TN295 



No. 9231 







o S> 












* „9 





,* 6 ... >*.**■* 















V* •«•• 





<>.. *'Tvr* a 




^- "vivas' » K v 

• °^ a* ♦;&& % a v •lift- %* -^ 







^\ 



tF*> 







"W 






*°**. 






:•- -£ 






• ^ A* •* 



rf^ 



• ^ A* ^ 






*^. 



f> cA 




















• «o 















<k 




M?A> *«V £ * % d$fef' ^f. ** *>Wa> X 







4 



**2*fcX *°-i£k* -<*••;£&:% c°*&£k* J *££»:% c 






4 O 











• ^ $ A 



** v % 





• ^o* : 







*bV 




*/. « 















^•v 



A * v *v 

























v^^ 




• A V *V *% 



^°V 






>.*.;««»• .^ , 






.6^ V **^^*' A" W' f ^ 

? *+* ''MIS'! /°* 












* ^ 




^0^ 

/% 








f .^L% ^ 




V^^V 





« ■ • . 




v^ 





















BUREAU OF MINES 
INFORMATION CIRCULAR/198 



Advanced Guidelines for Performance 
Testing of Two-Legged Longwall 
Shields 



By Thomas M. Barczak 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



Mission: As the Nation's principal conservation 
agency, the Department of the Interior has respon- 
sibility for most of our nationally-owned public 
lands and natural and cultural resources. This 
includes fostering wise use of our land and water 
resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, pre- 
serving the environmental and cultural values of 
our national parks and historical places, and pro- 
viding for the enjoyment of life through outdoor 
recreation. The Department assesses our energy 
and mineral resources and works to assure that 
their development is in the best interests of all 
our people. The Department also promotes the 
goals of the Take Pride in America campaign by 
encouraging stewardship and citizen responsibil- 
ity for the public lands and promoting citizen par- 
ticipation in their care. The Department also has 
a major responsibility for American Indian reser- 
vation communities and for people who live in 
Island Territories under U.S. Administration. 



Information Circular 9231 



Advanced Guidelines for Performance 
Testing of Two-Legged Longwall 
Shields 



By Thomas M. Barczak 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
T S Ary, Director 







Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data: 



Barczak, Thomas M. 

Advanced guidelines for performance testing of two-legged longwall shields / by 
Thomas M. Barczak. 

p. cm. - (Information circular / Bureau of Mines (1988)) 

Bibliography: p. 28 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27:9231. 

1. Ground control (Mining)-Testing-Standards. 2. Longwall mining-Standards. 
I. Title. II. Series: Information circular (United States. Bureau of Mines); 9231 

TN295.U4 [TN288] 622 s-dc20 [622' .334] 89-600167 

CIP 



CONTENTS 

Page 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 2 

Definition of terminology 3 

Performance testing goals 4 

Considerations in support performance testing 5 

Load application considerations 5 

Active versus passive load application 5 

Force-controlled versus displacement-controlled loading 6 

Vertical versus horizontal loading 7 

Static versus cyclic tests 9 

Contact configurations and initial load conditions 9 

Constrained load conditions 9 

Symmetric contact configurations 10 

Unsymmetric contact combinations 11 

Other parameter considerations 12 

Height effects 12 

Contact stiffness effects 12 

Load rate considerations 12 

Instrumentation requirements 12 

Basic component responses 12 

Stress concentrations 13 

Load transfer mechanics 13 

Changes in support geometry 14 

Description of shield mechanics and component responses 15 

Canopy responses 15 

Base responses 15 

Lemniscate link responses 16 

Caving shield responses 16 

Leg responses 16 

Unsymmetric contact shield responses 17 

Critical load test configurations 17 

Determination of support resistance 18 

Standardized performance tests 19 

Test documentation 19 

Performance tests 19 

Resistance characteristics 19 

Shield stiffness 25 

Leg mechanics 25 

Stability 26 

Load transfer 26 

Structural integrity 27 

Conclusions 27 

References 28 

Appendix A.-Shield kinematics computer program 29 

Appendix B.-Shield component responses and loading mechanisms 36 

Appendix C.-Support resistance calculations 51 

Appendix D.-Description of standardized performance tests 53 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

1. U.S. Bureau of Mine's mine roof simulator 3 

2. Two-dimensional diagram of two-leg longwall shield 4 

3. Leg mechanics 5 

4. Friction considerations in shield testing 6 

5. Zero horizontal load shield tests 6 

6. In situ horizontal and vertical loading of shield support 7 



ILLUSTRATIONS-Continued 



Page 



7. Shield displacement possibilities 8 

8. Generalized load transfer mechanics for two-leg shield support 8 

9. Generalized component responses for two-leg shield support 9 

10. Conceptual illustration of freedom in pin joints of shield structure 10 

11. Symmetric canopy and base contacts 10 

12. Matrix of symmetric canopy and base contact combinations 11 

13. Unsymmetric canopy and base contacts 11 

14. Instrumentation to monitor basic component responses 13 

15. Instrumented vertical and horizontal load sensing pin 13 

16. Monitoring leg closure using wire-pull displacement transducers 14 

17. Inclinometer used to measure leg rotation 14 

18. Free-body diagram for caving shield 16 

19. Critical load test configurations 18 

20. Horizontal shield reaction to vertical displacement 19 

21. Typically used rigid-body analysis of shield resistance 20 

22. Standardized test report form 21 

A-l. Shield components, joint identification, and component dimension nomenclature 29 

A-2. Geometric analysis of shield support 30 

Component responses for— 

B-l. Full canopy and base contact 36 

B-2. Base-on-toe contact 37 

B-3. Base-on-rear contact 38 

B-4. Two-point canopy and base contact 39 

B-5. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 40 

B-6. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 41 

B-7. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location 42 

B-8. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location 43 

B-9. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 44 

B-10. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 45 

B-ll. Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 46 

B-12. Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 47 

B-13. Full base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 48 

B-14. Full base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 49 

B-15. Symmetric full base contact and symmetric two-point canopy contact 50 

C-l. Moment equilibrium of canopy 51 

C-2. Moment equilibrium of canopy caving-shield combination (summation of moments at link center) 52 

C-3. Moment equilibrium of canopy-caving shield combination (summation of moments at tension link pin) . . 52 





UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 


cyc/min 


cycle per minute 


kip/in 2 kip per square inch 


in 


inch 


pet percent 


in/min 


inch per minute 


psi pound per square inch 


in/cyc 


inch per cycle 


psi/min pound per square inch per minute 


kip/min 


kip per minute 





ADVANCED GUIDELINES FOR PERFORMANCE TESTING 
OF TWO-LEGGED LONGWALL SHIELDS 



By Thomas M. Barczak 1 



ABSTRACT 

This U.S. Bureau of Mines report is intended to assist coal mine operators in the selection of longwall 
supports by providing advanced guidelines for performance testing and standardized test documentation 
to facilitate support comparisons. These advanced guidelines culminate in a series of proposed tests to 
evaluate (1) support resistance characteristics, (2) stiffness characteristics, (3) leg mechanics, (4) stability, 
(5) load transfer mechanics, and (6) structural integrity. The Bureau has conducted extensive studies 
on shield mechanics to identify boundary conditions that induce loading in support components, which 
is often not included in current testing techniques. This report discusses influential parameters that 
affect support behavior and provides insight into how components are loaded and what conditions 
produce the most severe loading. Testing philosophies and techniques in both active and static frames 
are discussed. Proper methods for determining support resistance are described and instrumentation 
requirements for advanced performance testing are provided. 



1 Research physicist, Pittsburgh Research Center, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA. 



INTRODUCTION 



This report provides advanced guidelines for perfor- 
mance testing of longwall support structures. It is in- 
tended to assist coal mine operators in evaluating support 
systems prior to purchase. It may also be of interest to 
other researchers and support manufacturers when con- 
sidering support responses relative to design requirements. 

The most productive and often most profitable under- 
ground coal mines in the United States are longwall mines. 
The decision to pursue longwall mining requires consid- 
erable capital investment and 5 to 8 years of reserves to 
depreciate the large capital expense required for equip- 
ment purchases (7). 2 The major equipment costs are the 
powered roof supports, representing about 60 pet of the 
required capital investment. In 1988 dollars, the median 
purchase cost of longwall roof supports was $50,000 per 
support or approximately $6.3 million for a single longwall 
face of average length (663 ft). The control of ground 
provided by these roof support structures is usually the 
determining technical factor in whether the operation is 
successful. 

Longwall supports are used to provide a temporary 
working space for personnel and machinery during the 
extraction of a coal panel. Their primary purpose is to 
provide stability of the face area. In doing so, they must 
interact with the strata to resist relative motion between 
the roof and floor as the strata tries to reestablish a stable 
configuration. More specifically, the support must function 
to (1) control vertical (roof-to-floor) convergence and (2) 
maintain stability against horizontal displacements resulting 
from strata activity. 

Because their operation is essential to successful 
mining, mine operators frequently require performance 
testing of longwall supports by equipment manufacturers 
prior to accepting delivery of the supports for underground 
installation. These tests generally involve cycle testing by 
vertical load application under a variety of canopy and 
base contact configurations to evaluate the potential for 
structural failure from fatigue loading. Despite these 
precautionary evaluations, support failures still occur un- 
derground on supports that proved satisfactory in the 
laboratory and often at loads less than the rated support 
capacity (2). Obviously these laboratory tests do not al- 
ways accurately simulate in-service load conditions. 

The U.S. Bureau of Mines has conducted extensive 
research on shield mechanics to develop improved support 
testing methods that will reduce the risk of support failure 
when in underground service. This research was con- 
ducted in the Bureau's mine roof simulator (fig. I). 3 The 
simulator is capable of simulating underground loading by 
providing controlled vertical and horizontal displacements 
or forces to full-size longwall supports. 



Italic numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
preceding the apppendixes at the end of this report. 

testing was conducted by personnel of Boeing Services 
International (BSI), Pittsburgh, PA, under the direction of Carol L. 
Tassillo, operations engineer, BSI. 



These research studies have advanced the state-of-the- 
art in roof support performance testing by evaluation of 
boundary conditions that induce loading in support compo- 
nents, which is normally ignored in testing. More specifi- 
cally, advancements in support testing have been made by 
(1) evaluation of horizontal constrainment of the support 
structure prior to load application, (2) distinguishing com- 
ponent responses for applied vertical shield displacements 
from component responses for applied horizontal shield 
displacements, (3) quantification of the effects of hori- 
zontal displacement applied in both the face-to-waste and 
waste-to-face direction, (4) evaluation of the effects of leg 
mechanics on support response, (5) identification of cano- 
py and base contact combinations that produce maximum 
loading in specific support components, and (6) compar- 
ison of component response and critical loading for 
symmetric and unsymmetric contact configurations. 

A format for standardized longwall support perfor- 
mance testing and test documentation is provided in this 
report. Currently, performance evaluation programs differ 
from manufacturer to manufacturer. As a result, a direct 
comparison of support performance is difficult. A stan- 
dardized documentation reporting format that will support 
development of a common data base in order to make 
more meaningful support comparisons is provided in this 
report. Standardized testing and documentation will also 
enable an industrywide historical data base of support 
performance to be developed. This historical data base 
would be a source of reference to industry personnel when 
purchasing new equipment. Such a reference will help 
operators select supports that are most compatible to their 
needs with minimum cost of testing and with minimum 
risk of failure. 

The scope of the guidelines presented in this report is 
limited to evaluation of the mechanical behavior, structural 
response, and structural integrity of the support. Proce- 
dures for evaluation of support compatibility with other 
equipment and evaluation of operating functions are not 
included in these guidelines. The scope is also limited to 
two-leg shield supports because the Bureau has not evalu- 
ated four-leg shields. While the mechanics of four-leg 
shields differ considerably from two-leg shields, many of 
the issues discussed, in particular load application tech- 
niques, apply to both support types. It is assumed that the 
reader has a basic understanding of support mechanics. 
Two Bureau of Mines Reports of Investigation (RI) are 
recommended as reference material: RI 9188 (2) "Vertical 
and Horizontal Load Transferring Mechanisms in 
Longwall Shield Supports," and RI 9220 (3), "Two-leg 
Longwall Shield Mechanics." 

This report begins with a definition of terminology to 
avoid any confusion in the meanings of terms used. This 
is followed by a brief discussion of performance testing 
goals. Next, several important considerations in perfor- 
mance testing are discussed in detail: Load application 
considerations, contact configuration and initial load con- 
ditions, and instrumentation requirements. Also included 




Figure 1.-U.S. Bureau of Mine's mine roof simulator. 



are less influential parameter considerations such as height 
effects, contact stiffness effects, and load rate consider- 
ations. A discussion of shield mechanics and component 
responses for several boundary conditions and loading 
considerations is also provided. The report concludes with 



a suggested program plan for advanced performance evalu- 
ation of longwall support structures. Proposed tests are 
documented on a standardized reporting form to illustrate 
the ability of the form to concisely convey test information. 



DEFINITION OF TERMINOLOGY 



The two-dimensional diagram of a two-legged shield 
support (fig. 2) illustrates the major shield components. 
These components are identified as the canopy, base, 
caving shield, front links, rear links, and leg cylinders. 
Reference will also be made to the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly, which includes the caving shield and 
link components. A brief definition of other terminology 



used in subsequent discussions of support performance 
testing is also provided in this section. Because this 
terminology may not be consistent throughout the industry, 
it is important that these terms be understood to avoid any 
misinterpretations. 

Probably the most unfamiliar and perhaps ambiguous 
is the term "constrainment." Constrainment is defined as 



Canopy 




Base 



Figure 2. -Two-dimensional diagram of a two-leg longwall shield. 



forced restriction, and is used in the context of support 
performance testing to indicate an initial shield condition, 
where the canopy and/or base is horizontally constrained 
prior to load application by forced horizontal displacement 
of the canopy relative to the base. Constrainment is a 
means to remove rigid-body translational freedom in the 
numerous joints of the shield structure to allow the caving 
shield-lemniscate assembly to fully participate in the 
shield's load transfer mechanics. The following are defini- 
tions of the specialized terminology used in this report. 

Constrainment. -Forced restriction (of the canopy 
relative to the base). 

Configuration, confacr.-Combination of vertical and 
horizontal contacts on canopy and base through which 
forces or displacements are applied to the support 
structure. 

Configuration, constrained shield.— Shield configuration 
in which the canopy is displaced horizontally relative to 



the base prior to load application to remove rigid-body 
translational freedom in the pin joints to allow the caving 
shield-lemniscate assembly to fully participate in the 
shield's load transfer mechanics. 

Configuration, restrained shield. Sh\e\d configuration in 
which horizontal contact restricts horizontal displacement 
of the canopy or base. 

Displacement, horizontal, face-to-waste.- Face-to-waste 
horizontal translation of the canopy relative to the base; 
i.e., the canopy is displaced towards the gob. 

Displacement, horizontal, waste-to-face.— Waste-to-face 
horizontal translation of the canopy relative to the base; 
i.e., the canopy is displaced towards the face. 

Displacement, vertical-Convergence of the canopy 
relative to the base by roof-to-floor or floor-to-roof 
displacements. 

Face. -Pertaining to the area in front of the supports. 

Load frame, active— A load frame in which one or both 
platens are capable of controlled force or displacement. 

Load frame, static. -A load frame in which the platens 
remain stationary and are intended only to react loads 
applied by an active support specimen. 

Load application, active— YLxXemaWy applied loading by 
an active load frame to a passive roof support structure. 

Load application, passive. -Loads, generated through 
reactions developed in a static load frame by hydraulic 
pressurization of the support leg cylinders. 

Loading force-controlled. -Forces applied to a roof 
support structure are controlled and the support canopy 
and base are free to displace until equilibrium is attained. 

Loading displacement-controllled— Displacements ap- 
plied to a roof support structure are controlled and the 
support reactions vary. 

Restraint-Contact that restricts displacement in one 
direction or more. 

Waste-Caved material behind the supports. Synony- 
mous with gob. 



PERFORMANCE TESTING GOALS 



The performance testing program should determine the 
suitability of a support to its intended application. Hence, 
the primary goal of a performance testing program is to 
simulate as closely as possible the various loading con- 
ditions that occur underground. However, actual under- 
ground loading conditions are not predictable from current 
strata mechanics analyses and are generally not well de- 
fined even in existing mines. Therefore, knowledge of 
shield mechanics is necessary to develop a testing program 
that will explore the full capabilities of the supporting 
system for a wide range of hypothetical loading conditions. 
While the performance testing program cannot ensure 
successful operation, it should minimize the risk of failure 
by accurately defining the capabilities of the support and 
conditions, if any, that will cause failure. 

The tests should be standardized so that they can be 
duplicated if necessary. All parameters that affect support 



behavior should be addressed in the testing program. Test 
results should be clear and well documented. It is impor- 
tant that loading mechanisms are correlated to support 
response so that unanticipated problems that might occur 
after the support is put into service can be better defined. 
This philosophy will also provide insight into design im- 
provements for next generation supports or support 
designs for other applications. 

This report addresses these needs by providing for a 
comprehensive evaluation of shield supports. Consider- 
ations in performance testing are discussed in detail and 
standardized tests are documented that include evaluation 
of the following areas of performance: (1) support resis- 
tance characteristics, (2) stiffness characteristics, (3) leg 
mechanics, (4) stability, (5) load transfer mechanics, and 
(6) structural integrity. 



CONSIDERATIONS IN SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TESTING 



This section discusses several considerations in perfor- 
mance testing. The intent is to provide an overview of the 
various things one must consider when evaluating a long- 
wall support. Included in these discussions are load appli- 
cation considerations, contact configurations and initial 
load conditions, influential parameter considerations that 
affect shield response, and instrumentation requirements. 

LOAD APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS 

Some fundamental decisions must be made regarding 
how the support structure is loaded. The primary goal of 
the test program is to simulate as closely as possible the 
loading conditions the support will encounter in under- 
ground service. This section discusses active versus passive 
load application, force-controlled versus displacement- 
controlled loading, vertical versus horizontal loading, and 
static versus cyclic loading. 

Active Versus Passive Load Application 



displacements. In contrast, a static frame remains passive 
and support loads are generated by pressurization of the 
support's hydraulic leg cylinders. 

Active load application in an active frame is the most 
desirable because it more closely simulates the behavior of 
the strata and support response when in underground 
service. In underground operation, the shield is set against 
the roof by pressurization of the leg cylinders to a nominal 
pressure. The support then reacts loads in response to 
strata convergence. This loading is duplicated in an active 
load frame, where the support is set in the frame at the 
designated setting pressure and controlled displacements 
are applied by the load frame. Generating loads only by 
pressurization of the legs in a static load frame does not 
permit controlled displacement of the canopy relative to 
the base. As a result, shield mechanics cannot be con- 
trolled. This limits the load conditions that can be 
evaluated. 

If tests are conducted in a static frame, the following 
recommendations should be considered: 



A decision must first be made as to whether the shield 
loading tests will be conducted in an active or passive load 
frame. An active load frame is one in which the load 
platens of the test frame are displaced to provide loading 
to a passive roof support structure. The Bureau's mine 
roof simulator (fig. 1) is an active load frame that can 
apply controlled vertical and horizontal forces or 

LEG EXTENSION 



Tests should be conducted at less than full first stage 
leg extension on shields with double telescoping leg 
cylinders. Leg force can be reduced by as much as 50 pet 
when the first stage of the leg cylinder is fully extended by 
active leg pressurization. The mechanics of the leg cylin- 
der operation that produce this effect are illustrated in 
figure 3. Basically, the effective area of the leg cylinder 



1 cr,A 2 



LEG CONVERGENCE 

L 







KEY 


L 


Leg force 




Trapped fluid 


tHH 


Pressure application 


A, 


Area of 1st stage 


A? 


Area of 2d stage 


<7|.2 


Cylinder pressure 



Leg force (L) =0| A 2 



Leg force (L) =01 A, 
Figure 3. -Leg mechanics. 



is reduced as the applied pressure is acted against the 
smaller upper cylinder piston area, as opposed to leg con- 
vergence where fluid trapped in the leg acts on the larger 
area of the lower cylinder. Therefore, even if the leg is 
actively pressurized to yield pressure, the effective leg 
force will be half that it would be if the same pressure was 
achieved by convergence of the leg cylinder. The reduced 
leg force would result in considerably lower loading of the 
support components and may lead to erroneous evalua- 
tions of the support's structural integrity. As illustrated in 
figure 3, this behavior will not occur when the first stage 
is not fully extended. 

Leg pressures should be higher than in-service yield 
pressure. In a static load frame where the leg cylinders 
are pressurized to cause leg extensions, leg cylinder seal 
friction and friction in the numerous pin joints of the 
structure oppose leg forces, which causes a reduction in 
support resistance (see figure 4). Friction effects are likely 
to be on the order of 3 to 5 pet of the total support resis- 
tance, but can reach 10 pet under some (unsymmetrical) 
load conditions. Therefore, leg pressures should exceed 
yield pressure by 10 to 20 pet when tested in a static frame 
to achieve leg forces and component loadings comparable 
to in-service operation where the friction effects are 
reversed. 

Zero horizontal load tests should be conducted. Zero 
horizontal load tests should be conducted, by placing roll- 
ers on the canopy and/or under the base as illustrated in 
figure 5, to develop maximum stresses in the caving shield 
and lemniscate links and to assess shield stability. Without 
external horizontal restraint on the canopy and base, the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly must resist the hori- 
zontal component of the leg force to maintain shield sta- 
bility. Also, the line of action of the resultant force in the 
absence of horizontal shield forces produces maximum 
bearing pressure on the toe of the base. 

Force-Controlled Versus Displacement- 
Controlled Loading 

Two methods of load application are generally available: 
one is to control the forces acting on the shield and the 
other is to control the displacements imposed on the sup- 
port structure. The preferred method of load application 
is by controlled displacement of the canopy relative to the 
base because convergence of the strata underground more 
closely simulates displacement control. 

Another reason why displacement control is preferred 
is because the shield components react loads in proportion 
to the component stiffness and relative displacements. 
Controlling the displacement of the canopy relative to the 
base provides a better control of component loading than 
controlling the external force acting on the shield. For 
example, there could be vertical and horizontal forces 
acting on the shield canopy and base that do not produce 
horizontal displacements and therefore will not produce 
significant loading in the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. 
Shield response to horizontal loading will be described in 
subsequent discussions of shield mechanics. 



STATIC FRAME TESTING 

^p>CZ ZZ7 I I I I I I l l I I I ZZZZZZ zJkcE 




\/ I / I I / I I / / A 

KEY 

•> Leg force (L) 

*■ Frictional force (f) 

ACTIVE LOAD APPLICATION — o Support resistance (F) 

<L-=»r r~7 / i i / i i i i i i i g3 <| 



F =L+ f 




Figure 4.-Friction considerations in shield testing. 



... mkk 



Resultant vertical force 



/ /_/_/ ; zzzzz / /_/_/_ / /_/ 




KEY 

— ► Resultant force 
t> Restraint 

Roller 

Shield displacement 



Resultant vertical force 
Figure 5.-Zero horizontal load shield tests. 



Force control allows the shield (components) to dis- 
place uncontrollably until the required force equilibrium is 
attained. Hence, force control can produce varying results 
in terms of load transfer and subsequent component 
loading. Because of these variations in results, 
displacement control is the preferred loading method. 



Vertical Versus Horizontal Loading 

Shield supports are designed to provide resistance 
against both vertical and horizontal loading as illustrated 
in figure 6. More specifically, once the shield is set against 
the roof in an equilibrium configuration, it may be sub- 
jected to various combinations of vertical displacement, 



face-to-waste horizontal displacement, and waste-to-face 
horizontal displacement as illustrated in figure 7. Compo- 
nent responses and developed stress magnitudes are sig- 
nificantly different for each of these load applications 
and all three should be imposed on the support structure 
during performance testing, individually and in 
combinations. 



Vertical shield loading 




Horizontal 
shield 
loading 



Vertical shield loading 



Figure 6. -In situ horizontal and vertical loading of shield support. 



VERTICAL 
DISPLACEMENT 




VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT Increasing No load 

load 




FACE- TO -WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




A \ 



FACE- TO-WASTE Increasing Increasing 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT load load 




WASTE -TO -FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




Figure 7. -Shield displacement possibilities. 



WASTE- TO- FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



\ 



Decrea 
load 



A 



\ 



Increasing 
load 



Figure 8 illustrates generalized load transfer mechanics 
for a two-leg shield depicting load development in the legs 
and caving shield assembly. The caving shield-lemniscate 
assembly has very little vertical stiffness and will not 
develop much loading from vertical displacements. How- 
ever, the caving shield does have considerable horizontal 
stiffness and will develop significant loading from hori- 
zontal displacements, provided the displacement is suffi- 
cient to overcome rigid-body translational freedom in the 
pin joints. 

Generalized component responses for vertical, face-to- 
waste horizontal, and waste-to-face horizontal displace- 
ments are illustrated for the leg cylinders and lemniscate 
links in figure 9. As seen in the figure, the behavior of 
these components is dependent upon the direction of the 
imposed shield displacement. Because these loading 
mechanisms are different, each displacement should be 
considered in the performance test program. 

Vertical and horizontal displacements or forces should 
be applied independently and in combination with one 
another after the shield is set at normal operating pres- 
sures. Because vertical loading will help maintain stability, 
it is recommended that vertical displacement (loading) be 



Figure 8.- Generalized load transfer mechanics for two-leg 
shield support. 



applied first, followed by either waste-to-face or face-to- 
waste horizontal displacement (loading) for combined load 
cases. 

Loading should be applied until one of four conditions 
is met: (1) leg pressure reaches yield pressure, (2) leg 
pressure is reduced to below setting pressure, (3) material 
yield is approached in one or more components, or (4) the 
shield becomes physically unstable or the contact configu- 
ration is altered from canopy or base instability. The 
magnitude of the displacement depends upon the vertical 
and horizontal stiffness of the support structure (4). For 
most shields, 0.5 in of vertical displacement should be 
sufficient to reach shield (leg) capacity, assuming displace- 
ments are applied after setting the shield with 2,500-to- 
3,500 psi leg pressure. The required magnitude of hori- 
zontal displacement depends upon the translational 
freedom in the numerous pin joints of the structure. Some 
shields may require as much as 0.75 in of horizontal 
displacement before appreciable stresses are developed in 
the caving-shield lemniscate assembly. 



L_l_l_M 



V 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT ^ 



1 




rrY^ 



\ 



FACE- TO-WASTE ^ 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT * 



1 




changes in strain and maximum strain magnitudes. The 
number of cycles should approximate the expected service 
life of the shield. Typically, 10,000 cycles of each load case 
are evaluated. 

CONTACT CONFIGURATIONS AND INITIAL 
LOAD CONDITIONS 

Shield response is largely dependent upon contact con- 
figurations and initial load conditions. Contact configu- 
ration describes the combinations of vertical and horizontal 
contacts on the canopy and base through which forces or 
displacements are applied to the support structure. The 
goal of the testing program should be to utilize contact 
configurations that produce maximum loading in each of 
the support components. 

Initial conditions describe the shield configuration and 
test procedures prior to controlled load application. Ini- 
tial conditions often dictate how the shield will respond 
and thus are critical to performance testing. The most 
important initial condition consideration is horizontal 
constrainment. 

Constrained Load Conditions 



\ 



WASTE- TO- FACE 



HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



\ 



\ 



1 




Figure 9. -Generalized component responses for two-leg shield 
support 



Static Versus Cyclic Tests 

Performance test requirements described in this report 
apply equally well to both static tests and cyclic tests. Both 
static and cyclic tests should be conducted. Static tests 
should be conducted first to evaluate basic load trans- 
ferring mechanisms and component responses under pre- 
cisely controlled loading. Preferably, these tests should 
be conducted in an active load frame. Cyclic tests can be 
time consuming and are often conducted in static load 
frames because of the time required to conduct the tests. 
The primary objective of cyclic tests is to evaluate fatigue 
failures. Both static tests and cyclic tests should evaluate 
boundary conditions that produce different loading mecha- 
nisms in each support component. Cyclic tests should be 
conducted under conditions that produce maximum 



Constrainment is a term used to define forced hori- 
zontal restriction of the shield canopy and base that re- 
duces or eliminates freedom in the numerous pin joints of 
the shield structure. Pin freedom, as conceptually illus- 
trated in figure 10, can be seen by physical inspection of 
the shield. In the laboratory, constrainment is achieved by 
horizontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
prior to vertical or horizontal load application. In an 
underground environment, constrainment may be achieved 
by advancement of the shield while under partial contact 
with the roof or if the canopy tip or base toe strikes a 
protrusion during advancement. 

Tests conducted in the Bureau's mine roof simulator 
indicate that for unconstrained configurations, the caving 
shield-lemniscate assembly is not likely to appreciably 
participate in the shield load transfer mechanics. Hence, 
when the shield is unconstrained, the vertical and 
horizontal capacity is controlled by the leg forces. 

The effect of constrainment is to lock up the structure 
so that the caving shield-lemniscate assembly participates 
in providing support resistance. Even in a constrained 
configuration, vertical stiffness of the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly is small compared to leg stiffness and 
most of the vertical load will be taken by the leg cylinders. 
Horizontally, load resistance provided by the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly can equal or exceed the resistance 
provided by the legs in constrained configurations. There- 
fore, higher stresses will be developed in constrained con- 
figurations than in unconstrained configurations and 
stresses will be a maximum when the canopy is displaced 
horizontally relative to the base. The caving shield and 
lemniscate links will show the most increase in loading, but 
all components will be exposed to higher stresses in 
constrained load cases. 



10 




CANOPY CONTACTS 



BASE CONTACTS 



HORIZONTALLY 
UNCONSTRAINED 




HORIZONTALLY 

CONSTRAINED, 

FACE-TO- WASTE 




HORIZONTALLY 
CONSTRAINED, 
WASTE-TO- FACE 



8 







J 


— . . •) 




• •) 




▼ ? 




- • •) 




? ▼ 




- . •) 




▼ 




. . .) 




i 




• •) 




▼ 




— • •) 




i A 



7 



8 




Figure 11. -Symmetric canopy and base contacts. 



Figure 10. -Conceptual illustration of freedom in pin joints of 
shield structure. Light area of pin joint is area of freedom; dark 
area is point of contact. 



Symmetric Contact Configurations 

Figure 11 depicts symmetric canopy and base contacts 
typically employed by support manufacturers. Each canopy 
and each base contact illustrated in figure 11 can be ex- 
amined in combination as shown in the matrix in figure 12. 
However, a goal of the test program should be to minimize 
the number of tests without sacrificing information on the 
safety and integrity of the support. Combinations that do 
not produce significantly different responses from another 
combination can be eliminated from the test program. 
The Bureau's research into shield load transfer mechanics 
provides insight into component responses for canopy and 
base contact combinations. This section discusses general 
considerations in symmetric contact shield behavior. 



Proposed contact configurations for advanced performance 
testing are identified in the "Critical Load Test 
Configurations" section. 

Canopy contacts mostly influence the behavior of the 
canopy; while the behavior of the base, caving shield, and 
lemniscate links is more sensitive to base contacts. There- 
fore, selective canopy contacts can be examined, but sev- 
eral base contacts need to be tested to evaluate all possible 
loading mechanisms. Furthermore, the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly has very little vertical stiffness (for 
horizontally unconstrained shield configurations). Almost 
all of the load on the canopy, regardless of the contact 
configuration through which the load is applied, will be 
transmitted by the leg cylinders to the base. Therefore, 
loading of the base and caving shield-lemniscate assembly 
is largely independent of the canopy contact configuration, 
and any canopy contact can be selected in combination 
with specific base contacts to evaluate all component 
responses except the canopy. 



11 



► ' My I J T T y 

■Ail 

J LI „L_ 




2.1 



2.2 



kkikk 
1 rA J. 

3. 




liiii ill 



4.1 



11 1 1 



6.1 



n 




7.1 



IT 

► 1 




4.2 



&"3* 



6,2 




S&"w 




Figure 12.-Matrix of symmetric canopy and base contact combinations. Numbers refer to contacts shown in figure 11. 



Full canopy contact is suggested as a standard simply 
because it is presumed that this configuration is most likely 
to occur underground. A more conservative selection for 
the standard canopy contact is concentrated load appli- 
cation at the leg location. Contact at the leg location will 
maximize base activity by maximizing load transfer through 
the leg cylinders. Likewise, canopy responses are largely 
independent of base contact configurations, and a full base 
contact can be used to evaluate worst case canopy 
contacts. 

Unsymmetric Contact Combinations 

In addition to the symmetric contact configurations 
previously discussed, unsymmetric contact configurations 
should be evaluated separately in the test program. These 
contact configurations promote the development of out- 
of-plane stresses within the support components. Figure 
13 depicts typically employed unsymmetric canopy and 
base contacts, which can also be examined in combination 
to provide a multitude of test configurations. 

In the discussion of symmetric canopy and base contact 
combinations, it was indicated that canopy contact primar- 
ily affects only the behavior of the canopy. For configu- 
rations with unsymmetric canopy contact, the canopy can 



CANOPY CONTACTS 



BASE CONTACTS 



I 


y 


— ■ ° 


»> 


I T 







V 










KEY 
V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 



Figure 13. -Unsymmetric canopy and base contacts. 



12 



also influence the behavior of the caving shield and the 
lemniscate links. In two-leg shield design with split-base 
designs, unsymmetric base contact (as shown in figure 13) 
is actually a misnomer in that the contacts do not produce 
out-of-plane stress development in the base. The two base 
units act as individual members and influence the behavior 
of the shield consistent with the mechanics of the more 
dominant base contact. 

In terms of critical loading, component responses, with 
the exception of the canopy, are likely to be dominated by 
the base configuration. Unsymmetric canopy contact will 
produce slightly larger canopy strains than symmetric 
contact, but the influence of the unsymmetric canopy con- 
tact on the caving shield is likely to be dominated by the 
base contact in all but full-base contacts. The dominance 
of the base contact configuration in the behavior of the 
caving shield, lemniscate links, and base members also 
makes worst-case symmetric base contacts more critical 
than unsymmetric base contacts. This suggests that in 
terms of critical shield loading, only symmetric contacts 
need to be investigated, but because load transferring 
mechanisms are also criteria for the selection of perfor- 
mance tests, unsymmetric contacts should be investigated. 
Specific unsymmetric contact configurations proposed for 
advanced performance testing are identified in the "Critical 
Load Test Configurations" section. 

OTHER PARAMETER CONSIDERATIONS 

Load application, contact configuration, and constrain- 
ment are the most important parameters to consider in 
performance testing of shield supports. However, there 
are several other parameters that can be considered, in- 
cluding height effects, contact material stiffness, and load 
rate effects. 



dependent upon the physical properties of the strata (5). 
Generally, stiffer contact materials will produce higher 
localized stresses at the contact locations. 

In laboratory tests conducted in a relatively rigid test 
frame, the resulting stress in the support structure is also 
strongly influenced by the rotational stiffness of the contact 
material. For example, contact by a 6- by 6-in concrete or 
steel block will produce up to several hundred percent 
larger strains in the support structure than will contact by 
a round steel bar. The steel and concrete blocks, because 
of the cross sectional area contacting the canopy or base, 
produce additional bending strains in the support structure. 
Steel blocks provide good contact stability and a conserva- 
tive assessment of component loading, hence, they are the 
recommended contact material. 

The canopy is likely to be most affected by material 
contact stiffness considerations its bending strength is 
generally weaker than that of the base. It is expected that 
the effect of the rotational stiffness of the strata will be 
less pronounced than the laboratory results because the 
strata are assumed to be less rigid than the laboratory test 
frame. 

Load Rate Considerations 

Some tests have suggested a load rate effect on shield 
strain profiles (5), but no conclusive data have been ob- 
tained thus far. Until more evidence of rate effects are 
documented, it is suggested that displacement rates of 
0.1 in/min be utilized in shield performance testing. There 
is also some evidence to suggest that slower cycle rates are 
more critical than faster cycle rates, but again the evidence 
is inconclusive at this time. 

INSTRUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS 



Height Effects 

Generally, lower shield heights will produce lower 
stresses in the support structure than identical boundary 
conditions at higher shield heights. This suggests that 
shields should be tested at heights slightly higher than 
anticipated for underground service. 

The increase in component loading at higher shield 
heights can be attributed to the increased stiffness of the 
shield with decreasing shield heights (5). Because the 
shield stiffness is greater, the same loads will produce less 
displacement which results in less strain development per 
unit load. The difference in strains between low and high 
shield heights is dependent upon the change in stiffness for 
different shield geometry configurations. Strain changes of 
10 to 15 pet are possible for maximum changes in shield 
height (geometry). 

Contact Stiffness Effects 

It has been established that shield responses are largely 
dependent upon canopy and base contact configurations, 
but the interaction of the support with the strata is also 



The support should be instrumented to determine (1) 
basic component responses and nominal stress develop- 
ment, (2) areas of stress concentration, (3) load transfer 
mechanics, and (4) changes in support geometry. Specific 
instrumentation for each of these requirements is sug- 
gested as follows. 

Basic Component Responses 

Figure 14 depicts instrumentation to monitor basic 
component responses and nominal stress development. 
Strain gages are used to assess structural deformations and 
pressure transducers are used to monitor hydraulic compo- 
nent responses as illustrated in figure 14. This instrumen- 
tation will provide a fundamental description of the shield 
structural response and basic design integrity. Load appli- 
cation should be terminated prior to any strain gage indi- 
cation of material yield to ensure elastic recovery of the 
shield, unless destructive testing is desired. Again, this 
instrumentation is intended only to determine nominal 
component stress development. It does not necessarily 
ensure the structural integrity of the support as it is not 
intended to identify stress concentrations. However, any 



13 



indication of component yielding by this instrumentation, 
excluding hydraulic component response, should be viewed 
as indication of unacceptable support design. 

Stress Concentrations 

It is usually impractical to put enough strain gages on 
a support to assess stress concentrations in all areas of the 
support structure. Localized regions of high stress are 
often dictated by abrupt changes in the geometry of the 
structure, and therefore are somewhat shield specific. 
Areas of concern might include leg sockets, hinge pin 
clevises, and regions around holes. Triaxial gauges should 
be used if the state of stress is not apparent in these re- 
gions. Photoelastic plastic can also be employed to 



provide a more generalized picture of stress concentra- 
tions. The plastic produces colored fringes when viewed 
under polarized light in response to stress profiles of the 
underlying structure. 

A primary concern in the evaluation of stress concen- 
trations is the promotion of crack growth from fatigue 
loading. Hence, an important consideration in evaluating 
structural integrity of the support is to identify inherent 
flaws in the structure. This can be done by ultrasonic 
techniques or X-ray detection. Knowledge of the stress 
intensity factors for the component steel should be ac- 
quired and used in conjunction with the nominal stress 
development measurements to assess fatigue related 
failures. 

Load Transfer Mechanics 



KEY 
o Strain gage 
H Pressure transducer 
• Pin joint 




Figure 1 ^-Instrumentation to monitor basic component 
responses. 



Some indication of load transfer within the support 
structure is desirable for evaluation of imposed loading 
and support responses to performance testing. The most 
critical requirement is to assess load transfer between the 
canopy and caving shield assembly. This is best achieved 
by replacing the canopy-caving shield hinge pin with an 
instrumented pin that is instrumented with strain gages in 
two orthogonal axes to determine vertical and horizontal 
force reactions. These pins are commercially available and 
can be configured to a specific shield design. Figure 15 
shows an instrumented pin used by the Bureau. Ideally, 
knowledge of load transfer at all joints within the structure 
is desired to provide a complete picture of load transfer. 
If instrumented pins are not available, then the lemniscate 
links should be instrumented with strain gages to assess 
load transfer to the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. 



-Canopy 



Insertion of 
instrumented pin, 
(see inset) 



Caving 
shield 





Figure 15. -Instrumented vertical and horizontal load sensing pin. 



14 



Changes in Support Geometry 

Appendix A provides a computer program for deter- 
mining the spatial coordinates of a shield geometry for a 
specified shield height. The program is written in Fortran 
and can be run on any IBM compatible computer. 4 In 
addition to this mathematical model, the following physical 
changes of geometry of the support structure should be 
monitored during testing. 

Displacement of canopy relative to the base. -Vertical and 
horizontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
should be monitored. If these displacements cannot be 
accurately determined from load frame information, then 
the support should be instrumented to monitor leg closure 
and leg rotation as shown in figure 16 and 17, respectively. 
Vertical and horizontal displacements are determined as 
follows: 



5 V = AL sinfl + L A0 cos0 and 
6 h = AL cos0 +LA^ sin0, 
where 8 V = vertical displacement, 

5 h = horizontal displacement, 
AL = leg closure, 
A0 = change in leg angle, 
L = initial leg length, 
and 6 = initial leg angle. 



4 Reference to specific products does not imply endorsement by the 
U.S. Bureau of Mines. 





Figure 16. -Monitoring leg closure using wire-pull 
displacement transducers. 



Figure 17.- Inclinometer used to measure leg rotation. 



15 



Leg cylinder compression.— Leg closure should be moni- 
tored by a wire-pull displacement transducer. In multiple 
stage leg designs, closure of each stage should be 
measured independently as illustrated in figure 16. 

Leg cylinder rotation.— Ltg cylinder rotation with respect 
to the plane of the canopy should be measured. Figure 17 
depicts a small analog inclinometer that can be used for 
such measurements. 

Plane of reference of canopy relative to the 
base. -Measurements should be taken to monitor 



orientation of canopy relative to the base. This orientation 
can be determined from inclinometers such as those 
described for leg orientation measurements. 

Shield height. -Initial shield heights should be recorded 
prior to each test. This measurement does not require any 
specialized instrumentation; any common measuring tape 
should be adequate. Changes in shield height during 
testing can be determined from leg orientation and leg 
closure measurements. 



DESCRIPTION OF SHIELD MECHANICS AND COMPONENT RESPONSES 



A discussion of component responses is essential to the 
identification of critical contact configurations and load 
conditions. Appendix B describes component responses 
and loading mechanisms for several load conditions and 
contact configurations. The mechanics of the support 
structure as described in the diagrams in appendix B 
should be understood to properly interpret test results for 
each load case evaluated. Specific component responses 
for symmetric contact configurations are described in the 
following sections. General responses for unsymmetric 
contact configurations are described separately. 

CANOPY RESPONSES 

Bending will produce maximum stresses in the canopy 
structure because the canopy acts primarily as a canti- 
levered beam. Maximum bending will occur when tip 
loading is a maximum, which occurs with two-point canopy 
contact with the contacts at the ends of the canopy as 
shown in canopy contact 3 in figure 11. Maximum stresses 
will occur just ahead of the leg connection or near the 
beginning of the tapered section of the canopy. Because 
the canopy structure is fairly stiff in the region between the 
leg connection and the caving shield hinge, loads applied 
to the canopy structure in this region (canopy contacts 4, 
5, and 7, figure 11) will produce minimal bending. 

Canopy contacts 4 and 7 in figure 11 are designed to 
transfer load through the caving shield, however, the 
caving shield has little vertical stiffness and most of the 
load for these configurations will be carried by the leg 
cylinders. Because the canopy is stiff in this region, mini- 
mal stresses will be developed in the canopy for these 
contact configurations. 

Overall, the canopy can be considered to be weakest in 
bending strength and strongest in axial and shear strength. 
Axial loading is likely to be fairly small and is produced by 
(1) horizontal components of the leg forces when the 
canopy tip is restrained, (2) resistance provided by the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly, (3) applied horizontal 



loading (displacement) to the canopy tip, or (4) by gob 
loading on the caving shield. Shear responses are likely to 
occur in the canopy structure for loads applied away from 
the leg connection, since these loads must be transmitted 
to the leg cylinder for transferral to the base structure. 

In summary, maximum stresses in the canopy structure 
are produced from two-point canopy contact with a 
horizontally restrained canopy tip. 

BASE RESPONSES 

Maximum stresses in the base structure will also be 
developed from bending. However, base structures are 
designed with a larger cross sectional area and are con- 
siderably stiffer than canopy structures. Therefore, bases 
are less likely to deform from bending and will develop 
smaller stresses than the canopy structure for similar 
contact configurations and load conditions. 

Two loading mechanisms are responsible for producing 
base bending. The most critical configuration occurs when 
the base is standing on its toe as illustrated in base 
contact 7 in figure 11. In this configuration, the rear 
lemniscate links act (in tension) to pull the base up and 
maintain equilibrium while the leg force acts in 
compression to push the base back down. Maximum 
stresses will be developed in the toe region of the base 
structure or under the leg connection for this contact 
configuration. Significant base bending can also be 
produced by simply supporting the base at its ends (base 
contact 3, figure 11) in the same manner as with the two- 
point canopy contact configuration. In this configuration, 
maximum stresses are likely to occur more towards the leg 
connection. Because the base has a smaller cross section 
near its toe than at the leg connection and since the rear 
link introduces an additional moment in the base structure, 
standing the support on its toe is likely to be the most 
critical contact configuration for the base structure. 
Horizontal restraint at the toe of the base may also be 
required to maintain base stability in this configuration. 



16 



LEMNISCATE LINK RESPONSES 

Lemniscatc links are primarily axially loaded members. 
Some bending can be induced in the link structures from 
pin friction, pin eccentricity, or from "curved" link designs 
where the line of action of the pins is not in line with the 
centroid of the member; however, in most cases bending 
forces are likely to be small. 

There are three primary mechanisms that induce signifi- 
cant stresses in the link members: Base bending, hori- 
zontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
structure, and one-point base contacts that promote 
instability of the base members. Without one of these 
conditions, link loading is likely to be very small since the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly has very little vertical 
stiffness (4). 

Maximum link loading will occur when the base is 
standing on its toe (base contact 7, figure 11). In this 
configuration, horizontal stability is provided to the base 
and canopy by the caving shield-lemniscate assembly, 
causing considerable strains to be developed in the lem- 
niscate links. Tensile stresses are developed in the rear 
links and compressive stresses in the front links for vertical 
shield displacements. Significant link loading can also be 
caused by single point base contact at the rear of the base 
(base contact 8, figure 11), where the front link also acts 
to maintain stability of the base. In this configuration, 
tensile stresses are likely to be developed in the front links 
and compressive forces in the rear links. 

Two-point base contact (base contact 3, figure 11) will 
also produce link loading, but because bases are generally 
stiff members, the bending in the base is relatively small 
and it is not likely to be sufficient to cause critical loading 
in the link structures. Theoretically, horizontal displace- 
ment of the canopy relative to the base can produce criti- 
cal loading of the link structures, but in practice rigid-body 
translation in the pin joints usually prevents the caving 
shield-lemniscate assembly from developing its full stiffness 
before the capacity (leg yield pressure) of the shield is 
reached. Horizontal constrainment of the shield prior to 
load application will reduce freedom in the pin joints and 
enhance link loading under all load conditions. 

CAVING SHIELD RESPONSES 

The caving shield is also most likely to be subjected to 
maximum loading from bending. As seen in the free-body 
diagram in figure 18, the caving shield is acted upon by 
hinge pin forces at the canopy joint and by the lemniscate 
link forces. The direction of these applied forces vary 
depending upon contact configuration and applied shield 
loading as seen in appendix B. Link forces must always be 
opposite one another to maintain stability of the caving 
shield. Aside from stress concentrations developed at the 
joint clevises and geometric discontinuities, maximum 
stresses are likely to be developed in the section between 
the front link and the canopy hinge. 



Canopy 



shield 




Rear link 



Base 



Figure 18.-Free-body diagram for caving shield. 



Contact configurations that produce maximum link 
loading (base contacts 3 and 7, figure 11) will also pro- 
duce maximum loading in the caving shield. Therefore, 
maximum caving shield loading requires relative hori- 
zontal displacement in the joints of the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly and will be enhanced by horizontal 
constrainment. 

LEG RESPONSES 

Leg cylinders will be axially loaded in compression for 
all load cases, assuming some vertical loading on the 
shield. Horizontal displacement can produce some 
bending in the leg cylinders if friction is developed in the 
leg socket and the horizontal displacement is not resisted 
by the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. Actual bending 
is likely to be relatively small. Face-to-waste horizontal 
displacement of the canopy relative to the base increases 
leg pressures while waste-to-face horizontal displacement 
will reduce leg pressures. 

The leg is the dominant load transferring member for 
most load cases. Hence, there is not a specific contact 
configuration for critical load evaluation of the legs. Can- 
opy contact 5 and base contact 6 in figure 11 are designed 
to induce maximum shear stresses in the leg socket area of 
the canopy and base, respectively, which is often an area 
of concern and failure. Because the legs are capable of 
relieving load by bleeding off internal hydraulic pressure, 
leg cylinders rarely fail structurally. Seal leakage is usually 
the most common failure of leg cylinders. Another critical 
concern is the ability of the yield valves to sufficiently 
displace hydraulic fluid to relieve leg pressures under high 
rates of convergence. Such convergence tests are discussed 
in the "Standardized Performance Tests" section. 

Tests should also be conducted to evaluate the effect of 
staging on leg reactions for various setting pressures. 
Effective leg area should be determined by evaluating the 
slope of applied force versus leg pressure plots. 



17 



UNSYMMETRIC CONTACT SHIELD 
RESPONSES 

Unsymmetric contact configurations are derived by 
combining symmetric configurations, one established on 
the left side of the shield and the other on the right side of 
the shield. The mechanisms for component loading 
remain essentially the same as for symmetric loading: 
axial loading is prevalent for the links and legs and 
bending for the canopy, base, and caving shield. Because 
unsymmetric contact can create out-of-plane stress devel- 
opment, unsymmetric contact configurations can produce 
larger stresses than similar symmetric contact configu- 
rations. More specific shield responses for unsymmetric 
contact configurations follow. 

° Unsymmetric (three-point) canopy contact produces 
higher strains than full canopy contact but does not 
produce significantly higher canopy strains than 
symmetric four-corner canopy contact. 

° Three-point unsymmetric canopy contact with only 
one contact at the rear of the canopy will produce 
larger strains in the caving shield and lemniscate 
links than either symmetric partial canopy contact or 
unsymmetric canopy contact, where the missing 
contact is at one of the canopy tip corners. Load 
generated by the unsymmetric three-point canopy 
contact (one contact at the rear of the canopy) is 
likely to be carried more by one side of the caving 



shield than the other and more through one set of 
links (left or right side) than the other. If the caving 
shield is twisting from the unsymmetric canopy 
response, a transfer of load across the caving shield 
may occur such that the set of links on the side 
opposite the missing canopy contact are more 
heavily loaded. 

° Individual base units in split-base designs act as 
independent members and do not promote out-of- 
plane stress development in the base units. Link 
response will be dominated by the associated base 
contact consistent with symmetric base unit re- 
sponse. For example, two different symmetric base 
configurations that produce opposite link responses 
will produce these same opposite link responses on 
the left side compared to the right side when these 
base configurations are combined in an unsymmetric 
base configuration. 

° Load distribution in the left and right side of the 
shield is dominated by the respective base contact. 
The side with the more dominant base contact will 
develop the most load. 

° Symmetric base-on-toe and base-on-rear configu- 
rations produce larger strain development than when 
these configurations are employed only on one base 
member in an unsymmetric configuration. 



CRITICAL LOAD TEST CONFIGURATIONS 



Critical load contact configurations for two-leg shield 
performance testing are identified in figure 19. Illustrated 
in the figure are four symmetric canopy and base contact 
configurations and four unsymmetric canopy and base 
contact configurations that are considered mandatory for 
performance testing. The symmetric configurations are 
described as (1) full canopy and base contact, (2) base-on- 
toe contact, (3) base-on-rear contact, and (4) two-point 
canopy and base contact. As previously indicated, con- 
centrated load application at the leg location can be sub- 
stituted for the full canopy contact if the shield will remain 
stable for these configurations. The unsymmetric contact 



configurations are described as (1) unsymmetric base-on- 
rear contact with unsymmetric canopy contact at the leg 
location, (2) unsymmetric base-on-toe contact with unsym- 
metric canopy contact at the leg location, (3) unsymmetric 
base-on-rear contact with symmetric canopy contact at the 
leg location, and (4) unsymmetric base-on-toe contact with 
symmetric canopy contact at the leg location. 

Also included in figure 19 are eight optional tests. 
These tests are not likely to produce higher stress devel- 
opment than the mandatory tests, but do provide slightly 
different loading mechanisms and therefore can be 
considered for critical load testing. 



18 



MANDATORY TESTS 
Symmetric contact configurations 

1 T f I T T I 



OPTIONAL TESTS 



jjhui 






f^-^f 




JMtt ft 







Unsymmetric contact configurations 









TTTT 

KEY 
V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right side 

Figure 19.-Critical load test configurations. 

DETERMINATION OF SUPPORT RESISTANCE 



Because active load frames provide controlled forces or 
displacements, information concerning shield loading is 
usually available from the load frame. Both displacements 
and forces should be known. In addition, it is necessary to 
know not only applied forces, but reactive forces as well. 
For example, figure 20 depicts a horizontal shield reaction 
in response to an applied vertical displacement of the 
canopy (relative to the base). While load frame informa- 
tion may provide resultant shield loading (forces), partial 
contact configurations should employ load cells to measure 
loading at each point of contact. 

Simple rigid-body statics are often used to assess shield 
resistance in the absence of accurate load frame informa- 
tion and are frequently utilized to evaluate support resis- 
tances underground. However, many analyses violate fun- 
damental equilibrium requirements by ignoring horizontal 
forces acting on the shield. For example, the analysis 



shown in figure 21 that is commonly used by manufac- 
turers is valid only for a very limited load condition where 
there is no horizontal force acting on the support. There 
is almost always a horizontal force couple acting on two- 
leg shield supports because of the inclination of the leg 
cylinders. Only if there is a frictionless interface between 
the roof and canopy or base and floor is there likely to be 
no horizontal force acting on the shield. Full shield equi- 
librium, both force and moment equilibrium, must be 
satisfied for all analytical analyses of shield resistance. 

It is recommended that each analytical analysis of sup- 
port resistance begin by drawing the free-body diagram 
for the full shield and ensuring that force and moment 
equilibrium is attainable. Appendix C contains the proper 
rigid-body static analysis for determination of shield 
resistance. 



19 



Resultant vertical 
force 



Horizontal 
force 




Horizontal 
force 



Resultant vertical 
force 

Figure 20.- Horizontal shield reaction to vertical displacement. 

STANDARDIZED PERFORMANCE TESTS 



The various issues described in this report provide 
insight into the performance testing of longwall supports. 
As seen in these discussions, several options are available, 
which makes determination of standardized performance 
tests difficult. The scope of the performance tests are 
likely to be controlled by the facilities and funding 
available. 

TEST DOCUMENTATION 

As indicated in the introduction, there is a need to 
establish a standard reporting format for shield perfor- 
mance testing. This can be accomplished by using the 
form presented in figure 22. This four-page form provides 
documentation for a test name, test series, objective, brief 
description of test procedures, identification of boundary 
and loading conditions, data reductions available for anal- 
ysis, instrumentation identification, and well-defined test 
results for both static and cyclic testing. This form will 
provide for a common data base to facilitate support com- 
parisons as well as provide a concise history of support 
performance test results. 

PERFORMANCE TESTS 

Given the considerations discussed through out this 
report, the following performance test guidelines are de- 
veloped. Six test series are noted on the test documen- 
tation form presented in figure 22. Each of these test 



series has a basic objective and it defines the basis for the 
proposed standardized tests. Within each test series, sev- 
eral tests are required to parametrically evaluate all influ- 
ential variables. A performance test report, using the four- 
page form documented in figure 22, should be prepared 
for each test. 

A discussion of each of the six test series follows. 
Appendix D contains performance test report forms (based 
on figure 22) with pretest information and data documen- 
tation requirements completed on the form for each test 
required in each of the six test series. Therefore, an op- 
erator can simply take these forms and provide them to 
the manufacturer as statement of required tests and 
reporting deliverables. 

Resistance Characteristics 

The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the resis- 
tance characteristics of the shield and to determine its 
maximum load carrying capability and supporting effi- 
ciency. The following tests are documented for this series 
(appendix D). 

Support Capacity-Height Effects (Tests CAPHTOl 
through CAJPHT04).-The objective of these tests is to 
determine the support capacity as a function of shield 
height. Vertical and horizontal support resistance is de- 
termined at leg yield for full canopy and base contact at 
various shield heights. 



20 




ASSUMPTIONS: No horizontal force acting on shield. 
KNOWNS: 



UNKNOWNS: 



ANALYSIS: 



SOLUTION: 



Leg force (L) 
Distances b, e, t 

Resultant vertical force (F v ) 
Resultant vertical force location (x) 
Front link force (FL) 
Rear link force (RL) 

Moment equilibrium 

M(A) = F v (x) - L(£) = O 
M(C) = F v (x + b) - L(e) - O 

F v = Me^D 



x 



(D(b 



f 



Figure 21 .-Typically used rigid-body analysis of shield resistance. 



21 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: Resistance characteristics 
Shield stiffness 
Leg mechanics 

OBJECTIVE: 



Stability 
Load transfer 
Structural integrity 



TEST PROCEDURE: 



TEST FRAME: Static 



Active 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Shield height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting pressure 



inches 

degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: Constrained 



Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \/ 
to establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



^WMM 



C OT 




Fill in appropriate O 
to establish unsymmetric 
contact configuration 



HM 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 

000 
000 

, O O Q , 
Canopy 



SU.W 



Right 
Left 



Right 



Oil 

Base 



Figure 22. -Standardized test report form. 



^ 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical force 
Horizontal force: 

Face-to-waste 

Waste-to-face 
Vertical displacement 

LOAD SEQUENCE: 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



kips/in 

kips/in 
kips/in 
kips/in 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Horizontal displacement: 

Face-to-waste 

Waste-to-face 

Leg pressure 

Cycles per minute 



Vertical-horizontal 
Horizontal-vertical 



in/min 
in/min 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical force vs vertical displacement 
Horizontal force vs vertical displacement 
Strain channels vs vertical displacement 
Strain channels vs vertical force 
Strain channels vs sum of leg pressures 
Vertical force vs sum of leg pressures 
Horizontal force vs sum of leg pressure 
Strain channels vs number of cycles 

COMMENTS: 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



horizontal 
horizontal 
horizontal 
horizontal 
individual 
individual 
individual 



displacement 

displacement 

displacement 

force 

leg pressure 

leg pressure 

leg pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 

O-OzO 




Fill in appropriate O 

to establish instrumentation 

location 

Nomenclature: L-Left 
R-Right 
C-Center 




Figure 22.-Standardized test report form-Continued. 



23 



MATERIAL PROPERTIES: 

Component Steel type 



Canopy 

Base 

Caving shield 

Links 

Link pins . . . 



Yield stress, 
psi 



Critical stress intensity 
factor, kip/in 



TEST RESULTS FOR STATIC LOAD TESTS: 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE: 

Maximum vertical force kips 

Maximum horizontal force .... kips 

DISPLACEMENTS: 

Vertical displacement in 

Horizontal displacement in 

SUPPORT STABILITY: 

Rear of base lifted in 

Toe of base lifted in 

Canopy tip lowered in 

Canopy tip raised in 

Canopy rear lowered in 

Canopy rear raised in 

Shield slid forward in 

Shield slid backward in 

LOAD TRANSFER: 

Leg forces: 

Vertical leg force kips 

Horizontal leg force kips 

Caving shield assembly: 

Vertical pin force kips 

Horizontal pin force kips 



LOAD DISTRIBUTION: 

Gage ID 

Canopy microstrain 

Base microstrain 

Front link microstrain 

Rear link microstrain 

Caving shield microstrain 

Left leg cylinder psi 

Right leg cylinder psi 



Initial conditions 



Maximum load 



TEST LIMITATION: 



Leg yield 
Instability 



Component strain 
Other 



Figure 22. -Standardized test report form-Continued. 



24 



TEST RESULTS FOR CYCLIC LOADING: 

LOAD ASSESSMENT: Number of cycles 

Load variation per cycle to 

ASSESSMENT OF GENERAL YIELDING: 

Component Location Residual strain, microstrain Maximum deflection, in Cycles 

Canopy 

Base 

Caving 

Links 



ASSESSMENT OF FRACTURE MECHANICS: 

Crack formation: Crack 1 Crack 2 Crack 3 Crack 4 Crack 5 

Component 

Crack length in ... 

Nominal stress psi ... 

Cycle number 

Crack propagation: 

Change in length, . . in/cyc . . . 

Maximum crack length . . in . . 

SUMMARY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT: 

Capacity: 



Stability: 



Structural integrity: 



Figure 22.-Standardized test report form-Continued. 



25 



Tip Load Capability (Tests TIP01 through 
TIP06). -These tests are designed to determine tip loading 
characteristics of the shield. Tests TIP01 and TIP02 eval- 
uate maximum tip load capability for symmetric two-point 
canopy contact. Tests TIP03 and TIP04 evaluate tip load- 
ing that is generated for full canopy contact. This is im- 
portant because this is the tip loading that will normally 
be generated by the shield underground for most setting 
conditions. Tests TIP05 and TIP06 evaluate tip loading 
generated by active capsule pressurization once the shield 
is set. 

Horizontal Support Capacity (Tests HCOl through 
HC04).-Tests HCOl and HC02 determine the shield 
resistance to externally applied face-to-waste horizontal 
displacements. Tests HC03 and HC04 determine the 
horizontal reaction developed by the shield for vertical 
displacements. This provides an indication of the hori- 
zontal force the shield might generate into the roof strata. 

Shield Stiffness 

The purpose of this test series is to determine the hori- 
zontal and vertical stiffness of the shield in accordance 
with the following linear elastic model (4): 

F v = K, * 5 V + K^ * 5 h and 



K 3 ** v 



K 4 * 



where 



F v = resultant vertical force, 

F h = resultant horizontal force, 

<5 V = vertical displacement, 

5 h = horizontal displacement, 



and K 1 ,K 2 ,K 3 ,K 4 = stiffness coefficients. 

The objective of these tests is to determine the stiffness 
coefficients (Kj,K 2 ,K 3 ,K 4 ) by applying independent con- 
trolled vertical and horizontal displacements to a shield 
while measuring vertical and horizontal shield reactions 
(4). These stiffness determinations enable prediction of 
support reactions when in underground service and provide 
valuable design information pertaining to component 
loading and shield behavior. 

Two parameters are considered influential in this test 
series: Shield height and horizontal constrainment. It is 
recommended that these stiffness tests be conducted at a 
minimum of two shield heights (one low, one high) and for 
both constrained and unconstrained initial conditions. 
Shield stiffness is slightly dependent on contact configu- 
ration, therefore it is suggested that the stiffness tests be 
conducted with full canopy and base contact and two-point 
symmetric canopy and base contact, as these two 
configurations should provide the extreme values. 



The following tests are documented in appendix D. 

Shield Stiffness— Constrained Configurations (Tests 
STFCOl through STFC04). -Determines shield stiffness 
for constrained initial conditions for vertical and face-to- 
waste horizontal displacements. 

Shield Stiffness-Contrained Configurations (Tests 
STFCOS through S7FCOS,). -Repeats tests STFCOl 
through STFC04 for vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacements. 

Shield Stiffness-Unconstrained Configurations (Tests 
STFUOl through STFU04).-Determwes shield stiffness 
for unconstrained initial conditions for vertical and face- 
to-waste horizontal displacements. 

Shield Stiffness— Unconstrained Configurations (Tests 
STFU05 through STFU08). -Repeats tests STFUOl 
through STFU04 for vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacements. 

Leg Mechanics 

The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the capa- 
bilities of the legs cylinders to provide specified support 
resistance and yield capability to the support. 

Evaluation of the yield behavior of the leg cylinders is 
accomplished by continuing to converge the shield after 
initial yield pressure is reached, while observing leg pres- 
sure and resultant support forces. Both legs should yield 
at close to the same pressures. Upon yielding, leg pres- 
sure should remain constant independent of shield dis- 
placement or leg closure. Vertical supporting force may 
decrease slightly during yielding, but any decrease should 
be very gradual. The most influential parameter for this 
study is the rate of displacement. It is recommended that 
displacement rates of 0.1 and 1.0 in/min be tested. Shields 
to be employed in burst-prone conditions should be tested 
at impact loading. 

Another important consideration involving leg mechan- 
ics is to evaluate the effect of leg staging on resulting leg 
force and subsequent shield setting force. As previously 
discussed, leg force is considerably reduced when the first 
stage is fully extended. This test series is designed to 
evaluate these effects by setting the support with a con- 
stant setting pressure at different shield heights and ob- 
serving resulting vertical and horizontal shield resistance. 
In addition, effective leg area for the various leg extensions 
is determined by evaluating applied force as a function of 
leg pressure. 

The final requirement in this test series is to compare 
effective leg area for setting (leg extension) with effective 
leg area for shield (leg) convergence. Effective leg area 
for convergence should be nearly constant for all shield 
heights (leg extensions), whereas effective leg area for 
setting operations may vary depending on staging mechan- 
ics. Leg area determinations are necessary to properly 
determine shield resistances from leg pressure 
measurements. 



:<> 



The following tests are documented in appendix D. 

Leg Mechanics-Yield Pressure (Tests LEGCAPOl and 
LEGCAP02).-Thc objectives of these tests are to deter- 
mine (1) capability of the shield and individual leg cyl- 
inders to yield at specified pressure, (2) reduction in sup- 
port resistance from yield and displacement between 
yields, and (3) comparison of leg stiffness by evaluation of 
increase in leg pressure per unit displacement. 

Leg Mechanics-Impact Load Yield (Test 
LEGYLDOl). -The purpose of this test is to determine the 
capability of the yield valves to effectively relieve pressure 
from impact loading without structural damage to the leg 
casing or extensive seal damage. 

Leg Mechanics-Leg Cylinder Area (Tests LEGAEXOl 
and LEGACOOl). -The purpose of these tests is to deter- 
mine effective leg area for leg extension from active leg 
pressurization (test LEGAEXOl) and for convergence 
from externally applied force or displacement (test 
LEGAC01). 

Leg Mechanics-Setting Force (Tests LEGSETO 1 through 
LEGSET03).-The objectives of these tests are to evaluate 
the effect of leg mechanics on shield setting forces and to 
determine shield setting force as a function of shield 
height. 

Stability 

The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the stability 
of the shield under various contact configurations and load 
conditions. Specific boundary conditions proposed for this 
test series are documented in appendix D. Vertical dis- 
placement, face-to-waste horizontal displacement, and 
waste-to-face horizontal displacement must be evaluated to 
properly assess shield stability. Horizontal force couples 
acting on the shield help maintain stability in certain con- 
figurations, and worst-case tests where horizontal forces 
are removed are included in these investigations of shield 
stability. 

The following tests to evaluate shield stability are 
documented in appendix D: 

Shield Stability-Tip Resultant (Tests STATIPOl and 
STATIP02).— The, purpose of these tests is to evaluate 
shield stability for canopy contact forward of the leg 
location. 

Shield Stability-Zero Horizontal Load (Tests 
STAHOROl and STAHOR02).-These tests are designed 
to evaluate the stability of shield when there are no ex- 
ternal horizontal forces acting on the shield. This load 
condition depends on the caving shield-lemniscate 
assembly to maintain stability. 

Shield Stability-Base-on-Toe (Tests STABOTOl and 
STABOT02).-Thz purpose of these tests is to evaluate the 
stability of the shield for a base-on-toe contact 
configuration with waste-to-face horizontal displacement. 

Shield Stability-Base-on-Rear (Tests STABOROl and 
STABOR02). -The purpose of these tests is to evaluate the 



stability of the shield for a base-on-rear contact 
configuration subjected to face-to-waste horizontal 
displacement. 

Shield Stability-Leg Imbalance (Tests STALEGOl and 
STALEG020).-These tests are designed to evaluate the 
stability of the shield for unbalanced leg pressures. 

Load Transfer 

The goal of this test series is to determine how much 
load is being transferred through the leg cylinders and the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly for various contact con- 
figurations and load conditions. Load transferring mecha- 
nisms are dependent primarily on base responses and hori- 
zontal constrainment for specific shield displacements. As 
previous discussions of shield mechanics indicated, vertical 
support resistance is likely to be dominated by the leg 
reactions, and the participation of the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly in horizontal support resistance will 
depend on the translational freedom in the numerous pin 
joints of the structure. Hence, an objective of these tests 
is to determine the participation of the caving shield- 
lemniscate assembly in the shield's load transfer me- 
chanics. Load transfer to the caving shield-lemniscate 
assembly is determined from instrumented load sensing 
pins at the canopy-caving shield joints. Both symmetric 
and unsymmetric contact configurations are evaluated in 
these tests. 

The following load transfer tests are documented in 
appendix D: 

Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions (Tests 
LTSUFWOl, LTSUFW02, LTSUWFOl, and 
STSUWF02).-These tests evaluate the participation of the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly and the leg cylinders in 
the shield load transfer mechanics for unconstrained initial 
load conditions. Test series LTSUFW evaluates vertical 
and face-to-waste horizontal displacements and test series 
LTSUWF evaluates vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacements. 

Load Transfer-Constrained Load Conditions (Tests 
LTSCFWOl, LTSCFW02, LTSCWFOl, and 
LTSCWF02).-Thzse, tests evaluate the participation of the 
caving shield-lemniscate assembly and leg cylinders in the 
shield load transfer mechanics for constrained initial load 
conditions. Test series LTSCFW evaluates vertical and 
face-to-waste horizontal displacements and test series 
LTSCWF evaluate waste-to-face horizontal displacements. 

Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Contact Configu- 
rations.- -The purpose of these tests is to evaluate load 
transfer mechanics for unsymmetric contact configurations. 
Test identifications and associated contact configurations 
are as follows: test LTSLEG, unsymmetric canopy contact 
at one leg location; test LTSBOT, unsymmetric base-on- 
toe contact; and test LTSBOR, unsymmetric base-on-rear 
contact. 



27 



Structural Integrity 

The most difficult and time-consuming portion of the 
program is to assess the structural integrity of the shield. 
As the previous discussions have indicated, several influ- 
ential variables must be evaluated to properly assess a 
shield's structural integrity. These include (1) height, (2) 
contact configuration, (3) direction and magnitude of ap- 
plied loading (displacement), and (4) constrainment. Hori- 
zontal displacement and horizontal constrainment are two 
very influential parameters that are frequently overlooked 
in support performance testing. Appendix D documents 
tests that include all of these parameter considerations. 

Structural failure is attributed to either fatigue or com- 
ponent loading beyond its design strength. Static load tests 
should be employed to evaluate the overall integrity of the 
structure from strength of materials considerations by 
evaluating various loading mechanisms that produce dif- 
ferent stress developments in each of the support compo- 
nents. Cycle tests should be conducted to evaluate fatigue 
loading using fracture mechanics principles to relate crack 
growth and stress intensity factors for specific component 
geometries. 

Fatigue occurs from repeated loading at nominal loads 
below the design strength (i.e., no general inelastic compo- 
nent deformation although there will be plastic deforma- 
tion on the microscopic scale at the crack tip). Mechani- 
cally, fatigue causes crack formation and promotes crack 
growth as the number of cycles increases. When a crack 
grows large enough (reaches critical crack length), crack 
growth becomes unstable and failure (fracture) occurs. 
Fatigue failures generally develop in or near weldments 
because of stress concentration formed by material discon- 
tinuities or inherent flaws in the welds. Fatigue failures 
generally develop gradually but fracture, which results in 
loss of load-carrying capability, can be sudden, being 
caused by one more application of load. 

Structural failures also occur from loading beyond the 
design strength of the material. The primary failure me- 
chanism is described as general yielding, in which cumu- 
lative deformations are sufficiently widespread to threaten 



the structural integrity or functional capability of a compo- 
nent. Failure (fracture) by static loading is unlikely, be- 
cause longwall roof supports are generally constructed 
from mild steel that exhibits good ductility. This means 
the steel will deform, usually bend, considerably before 
reaching ultimate strength and rupturing. 

Maximum stresses are likely to occur in areas where 
the geometry of the structure changes drastically, such as 
around holes or where plates are welded together, or 
where there are changes in material properties. These 
localized high stress concentrations may or may not affect 
the overall structural integrity of the component. The 
probability of failure from localized high-stress concen- 
trations depends on the ability of the structure (material) 
to redistribute the strain energy. If the energy can be 
redistributed through plastic deformation, then the 
probability of failure (fracture development) is reduced. 

Several tests are documented in appendix D to evaluate 
the structural integrity of the shield. These tests are di- 
vided into two main categories: static load tests and fa- 
tigue loading tests. Each of the symmetric and unsym- 
metric contact configurations identified in the "Critical 
Load Test Configurations" section (fig. 19) should be 
evaluated. The static load tests should be conducted for 
vertical, face-to-waste horizontal, and waste-to-face 
horizontal displacements applied independently and in 
combination with one another as indicated in appendix D. 
It is mandatory that all tests be conducted for horizontally 
constrained configurations to ensure full participation of 
the caving shield-lemniscate assembly in the shield's load 
transfer mechanics. 

A minimum of 10,000 cycles per load case should be 
applied for the fatigue loading tests. All mandatory load 
cases specified in the critical load test configurations iden- 
tified in figure 19 should be evaluated. If this number of 
tests is prohibitive, then full canopy and base contact, 
symmetric base-on-toe contact, and two-point canopy and 
base contact tests should be given highest priority. The 
number of cycles should not be sacrificed to permit testing 
more configurations. 



CONCLUSIONS 



Because actual underground loading conditions are 
rarely known, knowledge of support mechanics is essential 
to develop performance testing programs that explore the 
full capabilities of longwall supports. It is believed that the 
guidelines provided in this report will advance the state- 
of-the-art of shield performance testing. Several influential 
parameters that are often ignored in current testing pro- 
grams, such as horizontal displacement and horizontal 
constrainment, are included in the scope of these advanced 
guidelines. 

Equally important is the need to standardize testing 
procedures and test documentation so that a meaningful 
comparison of support performance can be made. Obvi- 
ously, there will be circumstances that dictate shield 



specific tests, but it seems reasonable that some basic tests 
can be conducted on all supports to provide a common 
and historical data base of support performance. It is 
believed that the proposed four-page test documentation 
form is a good start in that direction. 

If advancements in support design are to be made, 
performance testing must become more conscious of de- 
sign considerations. Although the main objective of the 
test guidelines proposed in this report is not design con- 
sideration, the tests will provide considerably more design 
information than current performance tests, which 
investigate fewer parameters and are conducted under less 
controlled environments. 



28 



REFERENCES 



1. Barczak, T. M., and C. A. Goode. Considerations in the Design 
of Longwall Mining Systems. Paper in Proceedings, International 
Symposium on State-of-t he-Art of Ground Control in Longwall Mining 
and Subsidence (Honolulu, HI, Sept. 4-5, 1982). Soc. Min. Eng. AIME, 
1982, pp. 

2. Barczak, T. M., and D. E. Schwemmer. Horizontal and Vertical 
Load Transferring Mechanisms in Longwall Roof Supports. BuMines 
RI 9188, 1988, 24 pp. 



3. Barczak, T. M., and D. E. Schwemmer. Two-Leg Longwall Shield 
Mechanics. BuMines RI 9220, 1989, 34 pp. 

4. . Stiffness Characteristics of Longwall Shields. BuMines 

RI 9154, 1988, 14 pp. 

5. . Critical-Load Studies of a Shield Support. BuMines 

RI 9141, 1987, 15 pp. 



29 



APPENDIX A.-SHIELD KINEMATICS COMPUTER PROGRAM 



A computer program 1 is provided that calculates the 
spatial coordinates for a designated shield height for a 
two-leg longwall shield with lemniscate linkage. The pro- 
gram evaluates the kinematics of the shield using a para- 
metric approach, which is outlined below and depicted in 
figures A-l and A-2. 

Note that in the test and figures of this appendix, 
lengths (distances between coordinate points) are prefixed 
with either an A (AL), indicating actual measured or 
known quantities, or an S (SL), indicating shield-height- 
dependent quantity that is unknown. 

Using figure A-2 and beginning with a selected value of 
SL- 



^eveloped by David E. Schwemmer, structural engineer, Boeing 
Services International, Pittsburgh, PA. 



1. Compute B 3 using law of cosines in triangle DGC. 

2. Compute SM using the law of cosines in triangle 
DFC. 

3. Compute -y 2 and y 3 using the law of cosines in 
triangle DAC. 

4. Compute *1, then shield height, Y3 coordinate, using 
trigonometry. 

5. Compare Y3 coordinate, plus thickness of canopy 
and base relative to appropriate pin connection locations, 
to shield height requested. Adjust SL accordingly until 
difference between computed and actual shield height is 
less than a prescribed small value, e. Steps 1 through 5 
are repeated until it is attained. 

6. Once the correct SL is found, basic trigonometry is 
used to compute the remaining coordinates and angles. 



AL3 



Lemniscate 
pole point 




Figure A-1 .-Shield components, joint identification, and component dimension nomenclature. 



30 




Canopy 



Figure A-2.- Geometric analysis of shield support. 



31 



C SHIELD GEOMETRY 

C 

C MODIFIED VERSION OF SHGEOM.FOR TO ACCOMMODATE TERMINAL INPUT 

C OF CANOPY AND BASE THICKNESS 

C 

C FILE: NEWGEOM.FOR 

C 

C PROGRAM FOR THE KINEMATIC DETERMINATION OF A SHIELD 

C 

C DUE TO NONLINEARITY OF GOVERNING EQUATIONS, A PARAMETRIC TECHNIQUE TO 

C ZERO IN ON THE UNIQUE GEOMETRY FOR A SPECIFIED SHIELD HEIGHT IS 

C UTILIZED. 

C 

IMPLICIT REAL*8(A-H,0-Z) 

DIMENSION VF(50) ,VL(50) ,XHT(50) , HFC 50) ,HL(50) 
C 

0PEN(UNIT=2,TYPE='0LD' ,FILE=' [METF. FORTRAN] SHIELD .DAT • ) 

0PEN(UNIT=3,TYPE='NEW« ,FILE=' [METF . FORTRAN]NEWGEOM. OUT » ) 
C 

READ(2, 1100)AR1 

READ(2,1100)AR2 

READ(2,1100)AR3 

READ(2,1100)AR4 

READ(2,1100)AR6 

READC2, 1100)AH4 

READ(2,1100)AV1 

READ(2,1100)AV4 

READC2, 1100)AL1 

READ(2,1100)AL2 

READ(2,1100)AL3 

READ(2,1100)AL4 

READ(2,1100)AL5 
READC2, 1100)AL6 

READ(2,1100)AL7 

READ(2,1100)AL9 

READC2, 1 100)ETA3 

CL0SEC2) 

WRITEC*, 1010) 

READ(*,1020)ASHT 

WRITE(*,1420) 

READ(*,1020)BAS 

WRITEC*, 1430) 

READ(*,1020)CAN 
C 

C BEGINNING WITH A SELECTED VALUE OF THE PARAMETER SL 
C 

PI=3. 141592654 
CONV=2.*PI/360. 



32 



c 






SL=30. 
ETA3=ETA- 
EPSILON=C 
DN=PI-. 1 
UP=PI+. 1 


>*CONV 
).01 


c 
c 
c 


DETERMINE 
OF SHIELD 


THE ANGLES 
(SHTO) FOR 


AND LENGTH 
COMPARISON 


150 




DO 100 1=1,150 
IFCI.EQ. 1 )SUM=SUM+1 



SM TO COMPUTE THE OVERALL HEIGHT 
WITH THE REQUIRED HEIGHT. 



IFCI.EQ. 150)WRITE(», 1160) 

IFCI.EQ. 150)STOP 
C 

AL1P=AL1/C0S(ETA3) 

TANG=((AR2*AR2-SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P)/(-2.*SL*AL1P)) 
C 

IFCTANG.GE.1 . .OR . TANG .LE .- 1 . ) WRITE (* , 1 41 ) 

IFCTANG.GE.1 . .OR . TANG .LE . - 1 .0)STOP 
C 

BETA3=DACOS((AR2*AR2-SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P)/(-2.*SL*AL1P)) 

SM=SQRT ( ( AL 1 +AL2 ) * ( AL 1 +AL2 ) +SL*SL-2 . * ( AL 1 +AL2 ) *SL* 

1COS(ETA3+BETA3)) 
C 

AN=SQRT(AL4*AL4+AV1*AV1 ) 

GAMMA2=DAC0S((AR1*AR1+AN*AN-SL*SL)/(2.*AR1*AN)) 

GAMMA3 = DAC0S( ( AR 1 *AR 1 -AN*AN+SL*SL ) /( 2 . *SL*AR 1 ) ) 

ALPHA2=DATAN( (AV1/AL4) ) 

ANGLE1 =PI-ALPHA2-GAMMA2 

IF(ANGLE1 .GT. (PI/2. ))G0 TO 510 

ANGLE3=GAMMA3+BETA3-ANGLE1 
C 

Y3 = AR1*SIN( ANGLE 1 ) + ( AL1+AL2 ) *SIN ( ANGLE3+ETA3 ) 
C 

C CANOPY AND BASE THICKNESS ASSUMES PIN LOCATIONS AT BASE 

C AND CANOPY CROSS-SECTIONAL MIDPOINTS 

C 

SHT0=Y3+BAS/2.+CAN/2. 
C 

TEST=SHTO-ASHT 

IFCABS(TEST) . LE . EPSILON )G0 TO 500 

IFCTEST.LE.O. )SL=SL+TEST/1 . 

IF(TEST.GT.O. )SL=SL-TEST/1 . 
100 CONTINUE 

510 SL=SL+SUM 

GO TO 150 
C 

C THE PARAMETRIC EVALUATION IS COMPLETE AND THE SHIELD COORDINATES 
C CAN NOW BE COMPUTED 



33 



C 
500 ETA2=DATAN(AL1*TAN(ETA3)/AL2) 

ETA1=PI-ETA3+ETA2 
C 

AL2P=SQRT(AL2*AL2+(AL1*TAN(ETA3))*(AL1*TAN(ETA3))) 

BETA1=DAC0S((AL1P*AL1P-SL*SL-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*SL*AR2)) 

BETA2=DACOS((SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*AL1P*AR2)) 

TRI=BETA1+BETA2+BETA3 

IF(TRI.GE.DN.AND.TRI.LE.UP)GO TO 110 

WRITEC*, 1400)1 

STOP 
C 
1 10 PHI1=DACOS((AL2P*AL2P-SM*SM-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*SM*AR2)) 

PHI2=DACOS((SM*SM-AR2*AR2-AL2P*AL2P)/(-2.*AR2*AL2P)) 

PHI3=DACOS((AR2*AR2-SM*SM-AL2P*AL2P)/(-2.*SM*AL2P)) 

TRI=PHI1+PHI2+PHI3 

IF(TRI.GE.DN.AND.TRI.LE.UP)GO TO 120 

WRITEC*, 1400)2 

STOP 
C 
120 X1=-AR1*C0S(ANGLE1 ) 

Y1=AR1*SIN(ANGLE1) 
C 

X2P=X1+AL1*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 

Y2P=Y1+AL1*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
C 

X2=X1+AL1P*COS(ANGLE3) 
Y2=Y1+AL1P*SIN(ANGLE3) 
C 

X7P=X1+(AL1+AL6)*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
Y7P=Y1+(AL1+AL6)*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
C 

X3=X1+(AL1+AL2)*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
Y3=Y1+(AL1+AL2)*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
C 

ANGLE4=DATAN((Y3-Y2)/(X3-X2)) 

X7=X2+(AL6/C0S(ETA2))*C0S(ANGLE4) 

Y7=Y2+(AL6/C0S(ETA2))*SIN(ANGLE4) 
C 

XR3=X7+AR3*COS((PI/2. )-ANGLE4) 

YR3=Y7-AR3*SIN((PI/2. )-ANGLE4) 
C 

X5=X3+AL7 
Y5=Y3 
C 

XR4=X5 

YR4=Y5-AR4 



34 



X6=X3+AL9 

Y6=Y3 
C 

XR6=X6 

YR6=Y6-AR6 
C 

X4=X3+AL3 

Y4 = Y3 
C 

AM1=Y1/X1 

AM2=(Y2-AV1 )/(X2-AL4) 

AB2=Y2-(AM2*X2) 

X0=AB2/(AM1-AM2) 

Y0=AM1*X0 
C 

ALANG=DATAN((YR6-AV4)/(XR6-AH4)) 

AFANG=PHI2-ANGLE4 
C 

C PRINT OUTPUT TO THE SCREEN AND DATA FILE 
C 



WRITE(* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITE(* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 
WRITEC* 



1210)SHTO 

1220)X0,Y0 

1230)X1 ,Y1 

1240)X2,Y2 

1250)X3,Y3 

1260)X4,Y4 

1270)X5,Y5 

1280)X6,Y6 

1290)X7,Y7 

1300)XR3,YR3 

1310)XR4,YR4 

1320)XR6,YR6 

1330)X2P,Y2P 

13 J 40)X7P,Y7P 

1350)ALANG/CONV, AFANG/CONV 



IOUT = 

WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 
WRITE 



3 
(IOUT 

(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 
(IOUT 



1210 
1440 
1450 
1220 
1230 
1240 
1250 
1260 
1270 
1280 
1290 
1300 



)SHTO 

)BAS 

)CAN 

)XO,YO 

)X1 ,Y1 

)X2,Y2 

)X3,Y3 

)X4,Y4 

)X5,Y5 

)X6,Y6 

)X7,Y7 

)XR3,YR3 



35 



WRITE (IOUT, 1 31 0)XR4,YR4 



WRITEUOUT, 
WRITECIOUT, 
WRITECIOUT, 
WRITECIOUT, 



FORMAT STATEMENTS 



1010 
1020 
1100 
1160 
1210 
1220 
1230 
1240 
1250 
1260 
1270 
1280 
1290 
1300 
1310 
1320 
1330 
1340 
1350 
1400 
1410 
1420 
1430 
1440 
1450 



FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
FORMAT 
END 



C5X,' 

(F6.2 

(1X,F 

(10X, 

(10X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

(5X 

( 10X 

(10X 



1320)XR6,YR6 
1330)X2P,Y2P 
1340)X7P,Y7P 
1350)ALANG/CONV,AFANG/CONV 



SPECIFY OVERALL SHIELD HEIGHT IN inches 

) 

12.5) 

'SHIELD HT OF 

'OVERALL SHIELD HEIGHT 

XO AND YO COORDINATES 



,$) 



• E10.4 ' NOT 



IS 



XI 
X2 

X3 

X4 

X5 

X6 

X7 

XR3 

XR4 

XR6 

X2P 

X7P 

LEG 



AND 

AND 

AND 

AND 

AND 

AND 

AND 
AND 
AND 
AND 
AND 
AND 
AND 



Y1 COORDINATES 

Y2 COORDINATES 

Y3 COORDINATES 

Y4 COORDINATES 

Y5 COORDINATES 

Y6 COORDINATES 

Y7 COORDINATES 

COORDINATES 



YR3 
YR4 
YR6 
Y2P 
Y7P 
F. 



COORDINATES 
COORDINATES 
COORDINATES 
COORDINATES 
LINK ANGLES 



ERROR ???' ,12/) 



COMPUTED' ) 
,E10.4/) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
E10.4,5X,E10.4) 



HEIGHT IS OUT OF NORMAL OPERATING RANGE'//) 
SPECIFY SHIELD BASE THICKNESS IN inches : ' 
SPECIFY SHIELD CANOPY THICKNESS IN inches : 
'BASE THICKNESS IS ',E10.4/) 
'CANOPY THICKNESS IS ' E10.4/) 



$) 



$) 



36 



APPENDIX B.-SHIELD COMPONENT RESPONSES 
AND LOADING MECHANISMS 



Utilizing mechanics of materials concepts and known 
kinematic relationships for two-leg shield supports, shield 
component responses for various canopy and base contact 
configurations and displacement loading conditions are 
depicted in figures B-l through B-15. 

Each figure shows three diagrams that depict compo- 
nent responses for vertical displacement, face-to-waste 



horizontal displacement, and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacement for a unique contact configuration. These 
displacement behaviors can be superimposed to describe 
shield behavior to any load (displacement) combination. 



KEY 
Contact 
Tension ( + ) 
Compression (-) 



TTTTTTTT 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT \ 

i-r 




1 ' \ No 

V < load 

fTTTt 



1 I T T T 



V"" 1 



( + ) 



FACE-TO-WASTE \ 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <">! ^'A 




oUr ; 



fTTTTMTT 



\ 



WASTE-TO- FACE 



HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 



\ 



\ 



"rrUl 




Canopy 

|s v 

Displacements 
S v >0 

Base 
Canopy 

Displacements 

S v = 
8 h >0 

Sh. 
Base 

Canopy 

Displacements 
S v = 
S h <0 
§ 8h 
Base 



Figure B-L-Full canopy and base contact. 



37 



KEY 
Contact 
Tension ( + ) 
Compression (-) 



J T T T T 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT \ 




I T T T T 



v-" 



(+) 



FACE-TO-WASTE V 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT M\ -'^r 




f f T T f 



WASTE-TO- FACE \ 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 



V^ 



\ 



1 




Canopy 

|S V 

Displacements 

8 V >0 

8h = 

ts v 

Base 

Canopy 

Displacements 
S h >0 

Base 

Canopy 

Displacements 
S v = 
Sh<0 
t 8h 
Base 



Figure B-2.-Base-on-toe contact. 



38 



KEY 
Contact 
Tension ( + ) 
Compression ( - ) 



»T T T T T 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 




» TTTTTTTTT 

FACE-TO -WASTE \ 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <->* 




▼ 1 1 I I 



WASTE-TO- FACE \ 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 




Canopy 

f«v 

Displacements 

8 V >0 

8 h = 

ts v 
Base 

Canopy 

Displacements 

8 V = 
8 h >0 

8h. 
Base 

Canopy 

IT 
Displacements 

8 V = 
8 h <0 
t 8h 
Base 



Figure B-3.-Base-on-rear contact 



39 



KEY 
Contact 
Tension ( + ) 
Compression ( 



-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT ^ 




Canopy 

(«v 

Displacements 

S v >0 

i*v 
Base 



T 



FACE- TO -WASTE V 

HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <") 



\ 



i 




Canopy 

Displacements 

S v s O 
S h >0 

Sh, 
Base 



T 



WASTE-TO-FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



(+) 



\ 



\ 



1 




Canopy 

Displacements 
S v = 
S h <0 

Base 



Figure B-4. -Two-point canopy and base contact. 



40 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 

f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
*■ «— Compression (-) 



FACE- TO -WASTE WASTE- TO- FACE 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 








Right side 



Air 




Figure B-5.-Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



41 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
- — » Tension (+) 
*«— Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 



FACE-TO -WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



WASTE-TO-FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 





Left side 



T 



(+i 



\ 



\ 



1 




Right side 



T 



(-) 








Right side 



T 



(+i 



\ 




\£T 



Figure B-6.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



42 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



FACE- TO- WASTE WASTE-TO- FACE 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 








Right side 



Air 




Figure B-7. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



43 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► ■*- Compression (-) 



FACE-TO-WASTE WASTE-TO-FACE 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 








Right side 



T 




\sy 



Figure B-8.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



44 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
Left side \ 



1 




FACE-TO-WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




WASTE-TO- FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



Left side 



T 



(+) 



\ 



\ 1 MS 



c 



u/ 



Right side 



T 



(-) 








Right side 



T 



(+) 



\ 




iir 



Figure B-9.-Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 



45 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



FACE- TO-WASTE WASTE -TO- FACE 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 









Figure B-1 0.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact. 



46 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
Left side \ 




FACE-TO-WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




WASTE-TO-FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



Left side 



T 



(+i 



\ 



\ 



1 






Right side 



T 



(+) 



n 




\£T 



Figure B-1 1 .-Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact. 



47 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



FACE-TO-WASTE WASTE-TO-FACE 

VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 

Left side \ \ Left side \ \ Left side * 

lL/ \JL/ Y-L/ 




Right side \ \ Right side \ \ Right side \ 

Uy YJL/ Uy 



Figure B-12.-Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



48 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► *- Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
Left side \ 




FACE-TO- WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




WASTE-TO- FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 






Right side 



T 



(+) 



\ 




\ 



u; 



Figure B-13.-Full base contact and un symmetric three-point canopy contact 



49 




KEY 

V Contact on left side only 
f Contact on both left and right sides 
— ► Tension (+) 
► «— Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 




FACE-TO-WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 




WASTE -TO -FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



Left side 



T 



(+) 



\ 



\ 



X 




Right side 



\ 



(-) 



\ 





Right side 



T 



(+) 



\ 




iir 



Figure B-1 4. -Full base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



50 



KEY 
Contact 
Tension ( + ) 
Compression (-) 



VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 




Canopy 

Displacements 
S v >0 

is v 

Base 



FACE- TO -WASTE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



V 
\ 



(-) 




rA^ 






Canopy 

Displacements 

8 V = 
S h >0 

Sh. 
Base 



WASTE-TO-FACE 
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 



T 



( + ) 



\ 



\ 







Canopy 

Displacements 
S v = 
S h <0 

Base 



Figure B-15.-Symmetric full base contact and symmetric two-point canopy contact. 



51 



APPENDIX C.-SUPPORT RESISTANCE CALCULATIONS 



Static rigid-body equations of equilibrium are developed 
for a two-leg shield acted upon by both vertical and hori- 
zontal forces. Figures C-l through C-3 illustrate free-body 
diagrams used in these analyses. Resultant vertical force 
and its location on the canopy and resultant horizontal 
force are determined from measurement of leg and front 
link forces. 

The following are the moment of equilibrium equations 
given on figures C-l through C-3: 



F v (x) - L(£) = 0, 

F v (x + b) - L(e) - F H (h) = 0, and 

F v (x + a) - L(f) - F H (z) - FL(c) = 0. 

Solutions: 

1. Solve equation (C-l) for F v (x): 

F v (x) = L(£). 

2. Solve equation (C-2) for F H : 

„ F v (x = b) - L(e) 



(C-l) 
(C-2) 
(C-3) 



(C-4) 



(C-5) 



3. Substitute equations C-4 and C-5 into C-3 and solve 



for F„ 



F v = L (V L ) - FL(V FL ), 



(C-6) 




where V L = 



and 



(£)(h) - (f)(h) - (£)(z) - e(z) 
(b)(z)-(a)(h) 

(c)(h) 



FL 



(b)(z) - (a)(h) 

4. Substitute equation C-6 into C-2 and solve for F H : 

F H = L(H L ) - FL(H FL ), (C-7) 

where H L = ^ + b (l)(h) -(f)(h) - (t)(z) -(e)(z) 
h h (b)(z) - (a)(h) 



and 



H c 



(b)(c) 



(b)(z) - (a)(h) 



5. Solve equation C-5 for x substituting equation C-6 
for F v 

L(«) 




Fv 



KNOWNS: 



Leg force (L) 
Distance t 



L \ 



$* P H 



UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 

Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
Resultant vertical force location (x) 
Pin reactions (P v , P H ) 

ANALYSIS: Moment equilibrium 

SM(A) = F v (x) - L(£) = O 

Figure C-1. -Moment equilibrium of canopy. 



\ 



\ 



52 




KNOWN: 



Leg force (L) 
Distances b, e, h 



UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 

Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
Resultant vertical force location (x) 
Front link force (FL) 
Rear link force (RL) 

ANALYSIS: Moment Equilibrium 

ZM(C) = F v (x + b) - L(e) - F H (h) = O 



Figure C-2.-Moment equilibrium of canopy caving-shield combination (summation of moments at link center). 




KNOWNS: 



Leg force (L) 
Front link force (FL) 
Distances a,c,f,z 



UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 

Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
Resultant vertical force location (x) 
Rear link force (RL) 



ANALYSIS 



Moment Equilibrium 

M(R) = F v (x + a) - L(f) - F H (z) - FL(c) = O 



Figure C-3. Moment equilibrium of canopy-caving shield combination (summation of moments at tension link pin). 



53 

APPENDIX D.-DESCRIPTION OF STANDARDIZED PERFORMANCE TESTS 

A sample description of suggested standardized tests is recommendations set forth in the main text of this report, 

provided using a preliminary version of the performance Thes test are categorized in terms of (1) support resistance 

test report illustrated in figure 22 of the main text. The characteristics, (2) shield stiffness, (3) leg mechanics, (4) 

first two pages of the test report are used to describe a stability, (5) load transfer mechanics, and (6) structural 

specific test. These tests are consistent with the testing integrity. 



54 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Support Capacity - Height Effects CAPHT01 thru CAPHT04 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine support capacity as a function of shield height. 



TEST PROCEDURE: 



Select four heights to include upper and lower end of 

operating range plus two heights in between. Load shield by 
vertical convergence of canopy to leg yield and document 
vertical and horizontal support reactions. 



TEST FRAME: 



Static 



Active xxx 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1.H2.H3.H4 

al,g2,a3,a4 



3000 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate y 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



»TffTffTf 



TIT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
■#■0-$- 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 



Left 



o 


/ ~l 


o 


o 


C J 


o 


o 


1 " \ 


o 


♦ 


« s 


♦ 


o 


t » 


o 


o 


/ "l 


o 



Right 



SlTl KIKl 



Canopy 



Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



55 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE: 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


0.1 
Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Displacement 


in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 




psi/min 


Cycles per minute 




cyc/min 


Vertical only xxx 


Vertical— Horizonta 
Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
i horizontal 


1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX 


vs 


XX 


vs 




vs 




vs 




vs 




vs 




vs 







Horizontal Displacement 

Horizontal Displacement 

Horizontal Displacement 

Horizontal Force 

Individual Leg Pressure 

Individual Leg Pressure 

Individual Leg Pressure 



Provide plots of vertical force and horizontal force 
at leg yield as a function of shield height. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



56 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Tip Load Capability TIP01 and TIP02 



Resistance Characteristics xx 

Shield Stiffness 

Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine maximum tip load capacity of shield. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with level canopy to generate minimum capsule 

pressure. Apply vertical displacement to two-point canopy 
contact. Place load cells at points of contact to measure 
contact loading. Determine tip load at leg/capsule yield. 
Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Active xxx 



H1,H2 in 

gl,g2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 

Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate SJ to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



m iwwwsi 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 
ooo 



13U 





O 


' ~l 


o 


Right 


O 


/" > 


o 


Left 


O 


1 * 
1 % 


o 




O 


1 1 


o 




o 


o 


o 



Right 



OTA KIKl 

Canopy Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



57 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


i n/mi n 
i n/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/min 




Leg Pressure 


psi/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical— Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vert ica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


cyc/min 
1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



Provide plots of load cells at points of canopy 
contact vs vertical displacement and leg pressure, 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Load cells — 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L -- Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




5S 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Tip Load Capability TIP03 and TIP04 



Resistance Characteristics xx 

Shield Stiffness 

Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine tip loading generated for full canopy contact, 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with full canopy contact in level position to 
generate minimum capsule pressure. Place load cells at 
canopy contacts to measure contact loading. Apply 
vertical displacement to leg/capsule yield. Conduct tests 
at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME ; 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 

otl,ct2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 

Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate \J 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



^? u? gvyfu 



in 





Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

O O O 

o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 
ooo 

rm 

Canopy 



OO 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

«H 

o 

o 



o 
o 
o 

$■ 

o 
o 



Right 



no 

Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



59 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



Vert i cal —Hori zontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



~xx 



vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Force 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 



Provide plots of load cell forces as a function of 
displacement and leg pressure. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Load cells 



60 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Tip Load Capability TIP05 and TIP06 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx Stability 

Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine tip load generation from active 
capsule pressurization at shield setting. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with level canopy position to designated setting 

pressure. Activate capsule to generate additional tip 

loading. Monitor tip loading through capsule yi eld. 

Monitor base stability during capsule pressurization and 
subseguent shield loading. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 

otl,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 

Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate \j 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



»TTTTTTTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



gJLLg 



Left 



OOO 
O O O 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

ooo 

OOO 
OOO 



oo 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

& 

o 
o 



Right 



OTA OO 

Canopy Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



61 



LOAD APPLICATION ; 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE: 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



Vertical— Horizontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 



vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Displacement 

vs Horizontal Force 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 

vs Individual Leg Pressure 



Provide plots of load cells at points of canopy 
contact vs capsule pressure and leg pressure. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Load cells 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



<>: 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Horizontal Support Capacity HC01 and HC02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity 



Determine shield resistance to face-to-waste 
horizontal displacement. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield at 3000 psi setting pressure. Displace shield in 
a face-to-waste direction. Monitor link loading and leg 

pressure. Maintain load until leg pressure yield or 

excessive component strain. Determine maximum horizontal 



force. Conduct test at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 

otl,g2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



MTTTTTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LPJ 



Left 



OOO 
O O O 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

4-o-#- 

ooo 

OOO 
OOO 

Canopy 



ou 



Right 



Left 



o 


/ *l 


o 


o 


/ I 


o 


o 


/ 1 


o 


o 


1 ~» 


t 


o 


' 1 


o 



Right 



no 

Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



63 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



Hold 
0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
i n/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 




vs 


Horizontal 


Force 


XX 


XX vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 




XX vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 




XX vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 





INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




(>4 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Horizontal Support Capacity HC03 and HC04 



Resistance Characteristics xx 

Shield Stiffness 

Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine horizontal load reaction to applied vertical 
displacement. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield at 3000 psi setting pressure. Apply vertical 
displacement to leg yield. Monitor horizontal force 
reaction developed from vertical displacement. Conduct 
at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Active xxx 



H1,H2 
al,g2 

3000 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



,TTTTHTT 



TIT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

-#•0-0- 

ooo 
o o o 

OOP 
Canopy 



oo 



Right 
Left 



o 


/ ~, 


o 


o 


/ \ 


o 


o 


1 » 


o 


4> 




& 


o 


1 * 


o 


o 


' s "*l 


o 



Right 



Base 



SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 



65 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


0.1 
Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Displacement 


in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 




psi/min 


Cycles per minute 
Vertical only xxx 


Vert i cal — Hori zonta 
Hor i zontal — Vert i ca 
i horizontal 


cyc/min 
1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertica 
vs Vertica 
vs Vertica 
vs Vertica 
vs Sum of 
vs Sum of 
vs Sum of 
vs Number 



1 Displacement 
1 Displacement 
1 Displacement 
1 Force 
Leg Pressures 
Leg Pressures 
Leg Pressures 
of cycles 



vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Reaction fixture 

Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L -- Left side 
R ~ Right side 
C — Center 




66 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFC01 and STFC02 



Resistance Characteristics 

Shield Stiffness xx 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 

Static Active xxx 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 

Setting Pressure 

Constrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate y to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Fill in appropriate Q to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



H1,H2 in 

al,a2 degrees from vertical 
degrees from 



horizontal 
3000 psi 

Unconstrained 



TTTMTTT 




OJJ7 



Left 



O OO 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



oiy 





O 


/ "l 


o 


Right 


O 


/ \ 


o 


Left 


O 

o 


1 * 
1 "» 


o 

t 




o 


'~1 


o 



Right 



rro no 

Canopy Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



67 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/mi n 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/min 




Leg Pressure 


psi/min 




Cycles per minute 


cyc/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vert ica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


1 XXX 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



XX vs 

XX vs 

vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Individual 


vs 


Individual 


vs 


Individual 







Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




OS 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFC03 and STFC04 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFC01 and STFC02. 



TEST FRAME ; 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 

al,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



^T\7\?y\7 




Fill in appropriate O t° 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

t%t 

o o o 

OOP 
Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



o 


/"» 


o 


o 




o 


o 


/ "» 


o 


* 




^ 


o 


1 » 


o 


o 


1 ™"l 


o 



Right 



Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



69 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 
Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Force 
Force 

Displacement 
Displacement 



0.1 
0.1 



Vert i cal --Hori zontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
i n/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/min 
psi/min 
cyc/min 

xxx 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 
xx 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



70 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFC05 and STFC06 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE i Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 

Static Active xxx 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 

Setting Pressure 

Constrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



H1,H2 in 



otl,g2 







degrees from vertical 
degrees from 



horizontal 
3000 psi 

Unconstrained 



MTTffTf 




o_o 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

•$-0-0- 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



oo 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 



o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

0- 

o 
o 



Right 



Canopy Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



71 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 



AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 


in/mi n 

psi/min 

cyc/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal—Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


1 XXX 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


XX vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 


Displacement 
Force 




vs 




vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 




vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 




vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 





INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



72 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFC07 and STFC08 



Resistance Characteristics 

Shield Stiffness xx 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFC05 and STFC06. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 

al,g2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



jsmiMi 




O-O 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

■#■0-$- 
o o o 

o o o 

.OOP. 

KTU 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 



Left 



o 


/ ~l 


o 


o 


V * 


o 


o 


o 


o 


♦ 


o 


♦ 


o 


1 1 


o 


o 


;"' 


o 



Right 



Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



73 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 


kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 XXX 


Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 


Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 


Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 


1 


Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX vs 

XX vs 

vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 


vs 
vs 


Horizontal 
Individual 


vs 


Individual 


vs 


Individual 







Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 



Nomenclature: 



L — 
R — 
C — 



Left side 
Right side 
Center 




74 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFU01 and STFU02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ . ) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 

Static Active xxx 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



H1.H2 in 



0tl,0t2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



»MTfTTTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



lllSj 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
-#-0-0- 

ooo 
o o o 

OOP 

OTA 

Canopy 



OO 



Right 
Left 



o 


'~1 


o 


o 


\ ^ 


o 


o 


t ~\ 


o 


<$> 


1 * 


& 


o 


t » 


o 


o 


/ **l 


o 



Right 



Ofll 

Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



75 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 



AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 




Leg Pressure 


psi/min 




Cycles per minute 


cyc/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal —Vert ica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


1 XXX 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX vs 


Horizontal 


XX vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Individual 


vs 


Individual 


vs 


Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R — Right side 
C ~ Center 




76 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFU03 and STFU04 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFU01 and STFU02. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 

otl,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate y t0 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



H112WL 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



y\m 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 
-0-O4- 

ooo 
o o o 

.OOP. 

KTU 

Canopy 



ey_y 



Right 



Left 



O 
O 
O 

O 

o 



Right 



mm 

Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



77 



LOAD APPLICATION: 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
i n/mi n 
in/min 
i n/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 XXX 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



> > > 

X X 
X X 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 


VS 


Horizontal 


VS 
VS 
VS 


Individual 
Individual 
Individual 







Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




78 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Shield Stiffness - STFU05 and STFU06 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to 
horz displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. 
displ. 

Static Active xxx 



TEST FRAME: 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



H1,H2 in 



al,ot2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



cXilUIUL 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



OJJ? 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

$8 

o o o 

.OOP. 
Canopy 



OO 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

<H 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



OA7\ 

Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



79 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


0.1 
Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only 


Displacement 0.1 

Vert i cal — Hor i zonta 
Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
j horizontal 


in/min 
psi/min 
eye /mi n 

1 XXX 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

vs Individual 

vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R -- Right side 
C — Center 




80 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stiffness - STFU07 and STFU08 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFU05 and STFU06. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1.H2 in 

al,g2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 

Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate \7 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



C^ 



IMMM1 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
■#-0-$- 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



in 

o 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

$■ 

o 
o 



3 



Right 



on o/ra 

Canopy Base 



SHIELD STIFFNESS 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



81 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 

kips/min 

kips/min 

in/min 

in/min 

in/min 

psi/min 

cyc/min 

1 XXX 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal — Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX vs 

XX vs 

vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 


Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 


XX 
XX 


vs 




vs 
vs 




vs 









INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R — Right side 
C -- Center 



82 



LEG MECHANICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Leg Mechanics - Yield Pressure. Tests LEGCAPOl and LEGCA002 



Resistance Characteristics 

Shield Stiffness 

Leg Mechanics xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine: (l)capability of shield and legs to yield at 

specified pressures; (2)reduction in support resistance and 
displacement between yields; (3) comparison of leg stiffness. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Apply vertical displacement to shield until leg pressure is 
reached. Continue to provide vertical displacement through 
succession of leg yields. 

Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Fill in appropriate y 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 

al,ot2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 

Unconstrained xxx 



,ffflffll 



ITT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



yuuy 



Left 



O O O 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

-$-0-0- 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



OO 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



Canopy Base 



LEG MECHANICS 



83 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
Horizontal only Horizontal— V 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 




kips/mi n 






kips/min 






kips/min 




0.1 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 






in/mi n 






psi/min 
cyc/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


izonta 
ertica 


1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 
~ vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure xx 
Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




84 



LEG MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Leg mechanics - Impact Load Yield. Test LEGYLD01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine ability of yield valves to effectively relieve 
pressure from impact loading without structural damage to 
casing or seal damage. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg cylinder from shield. Install in fixture. 

Pressurize leg to yield pressure. Drop weight on leg 

to simulate impact loading. Conduct tests at two leg 

extensions. Note: Alternative procedure is to leave leg 
in shield and impact load entire shield. After test, inspect 
for seal leakage by loading leg and observing any bleedoff. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static N/A 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained N/A 



Fill in appropriate y to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Active N/A 



H1.H2 in 
degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



yield 
Unconstrained 



N/A 



jnniiii 



Remove leg 
for test 



KKE 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



1111 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 
Left 



o 
o 
o 

4\ 

o 
o 



o 
o 



Right 



flTO KlKl 

Canopy Base 



LEG MECHANICS 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 



85 



AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement Impact 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical—Horizontal 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 











DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 



Measure residual strain in leg cylinder casing. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 



Nomenclature: 



L — 
R — 
C — 



Left side 
Right side 
Center 



86 



LEG MECHANICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Leg Mechanics - Leg Cylinder Area. Test LEGAC001 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine effective leg area for leg extension from active 
leg pressurization. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg from shield. Install in test fixture in vertical 
orientation. Collapse leg to lowest position. Raise to 
height HI. Set leg at desiginated setting pressure. Measure 
setting force applied to test frame. Raise to height H2. 
Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat test. Heights H2 
or H3 should produce full extension of bottom leg stage. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2.H3 in 

gl t ct2,a3 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained N/A Unconstrained N/A 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



JL1SL31WL 



Remove leg 
for test 



MI 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



OJJ? 



Left 



O O O 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 
Left 



urn 

Canopy 



O 
O 

o 

<N 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 



Right 



Base 



LEG MECHANICS 



87 



LOAD APPLICATION ; 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



Hold 



kips/mi n 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/min 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Hold Vertical— Horizontal 
Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure xx 
Leg Pressure 



Provide plot of effective leg area (computed as ratio 
of vertical force to leg pressure) as a function of 
leg height. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




88 



LEG MECHANICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Leg Mechanics - leg Cylinder Area. Test LEGACOOl. 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine effective leg area for leg convergence. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg from shield. Install leg in test fixture in 

vertical orientation. Collapse leg to lowest position. 

Raise to height HI. Apply vertical displacement. Measure 
applied vertical force and leg pressure. Compute effective 
area as ratio of force to leg pressure. Raise to height H2. 
Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat test. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained N/A 



Fill in appropriate \J 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



H1,H2,H3 in 

gl,ot2,a3 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Unconstrained N/A 

JLW115L1 



Remove leg 
for test 



^TM 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



yjLP 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

o o o 

o o o 

, o o o , 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



Base 



LEG MECHANICS 



89 



LOAD APPLICATION ; 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE: 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



Vert i cal — Hori zontal 
Hori zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 
vs 



Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 



Provide plot of effective leg area (computed as ratio 
vertical force to leg pressure) as a function of leg 
height. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



90 



LEG MECHANICS 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Leg Mechanics - Setting Force. Tests LEGSET01 thru LEGSET03 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



xx 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield setting force as a function of shield 
height for constant setting pressure. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Col lapse shield completely. Raise to height HI. Set shield 
at desiginated setting pressure. Measure setting (vertical 
and horizontal) force applied to test frame. Raise shield 
to height H2. Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat 
test. Do not lower shield between tests. At least one test 



TEST FRAME: 



height should produce full extension of bottom leg stage. 
Static Active xxx 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Fill in appropriate y 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



H1,H2,H3 

al > g2 > a3 





in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



»TTfTffTf 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



\7\7VU 



Left 



O O O 
OOO 
O O O 
OOO 
OOO 

-#-0-$- 
000 

OOO 
OOO 



00 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 

o 

o 



o 
o 
o 

& 

o 
o 



Right 



rm Kin 

Canopy Base 



LEG MECHANICS 



91 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE: 



Vertical Force 


Force 
Force 

Displacement 
Displacement 

Vertical — Hor 
Horizontal — Vi 
J horizontal 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 




kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 




kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Hold 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 




in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 




psi/min 
cyc/min 


Vertical only Hold 


izonta 
srtica 


1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Individual 


XX vs 
XX vs 


Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



Provide plot of setting force as a function of shield 
height. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 



Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




i>: 



STABILITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stability - Tip Resultant. STATIP01 and STATIPQ2 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Evaluate shield stability for canopy contact forward of leg 
connection. 



TEST PROCEDURE : PI ace contact at canopy leg connection. Apply vertical 

displacement until leg yields. Monitor canopy and base 

rotation. Observe rotations which change contact 

configuration. Move contact further towards tip and repeat 
test until instability is observed. Conduct test at low and 
high shield height. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1.H2 in 



otl,g2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Fill in appropriate \J to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Unconstrained xxx 



jtimiii 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



1111 



Left 



OOO 
O O O 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

t8S 

OOO 

,000, 

mi 

Canopy 



U.U 



Right 



Left 



O 
O 
O 

M 
o 
o 



Right 



no 

Base 



STABILITY 



93 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 
kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 




Leg Pressure 


psi/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical — Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


cyc/min 
1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



XX vs 

XX vs 

vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 
Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 

XX vs 

vs 


Individual 
Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




94 



STABILITY 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
TEST NAME : Shield Stability-Zero Horizontal Load. STAH0R01 and STAH0R02 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Determine shield stability when there are no horizontal 
forces acting on the shield. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Eliminate horizontal loading by allowing canopy and base to 
displace freely in horizontal direction by placing rollers 
on canopy and under base or by allowing loading platens to 
displace freely. Set shield. Apply vertical displacement 
to leg yield. Monitor horizontal displacement and link 
strain. Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1,H2 in 



01,02 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Rollers 



Fill in appropriate y to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



31111111 



Rollers — •& * v 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



V \7 y y 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

O O O 

o o o 
o o o 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 



UH 



Right 
Left 



Canopy 



O 
O 

o 

«H 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



Base 



STABILITY 



95 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only Vertical —Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal —Vert ica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 




1 




XXX 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

vs Individual 

" vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




96 



STABILITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stability - Base-on-toe. STABOTOl and STAB0T02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stability for base-on-toe configuration 
with waste-to-face hoizontal displacement. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in base-on-toe configuration. Apply vertical 
displacement until leg pressure reaches 80 pet of yield 
pressure. Apply waste-to-face horizontal displacement. 
Monitor shield stability and link loading. Conduct test at 
low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



H1.H2 in 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 0.80 yld 



01,012 







degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained 



Fill in appropriate y to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Unconstrained xxx 



JIII1II1L, 



TM 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



vvvv 



Left 



O O O 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

$8 

o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

4H 
o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



atta o/ra 

Canopy Base 



STABILITY 



97 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement in/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 

xxx 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Hor i zontal — Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 
" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



xx 

XX 
XX 
XX 



Fill in appropriate Q to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




98 



STABILITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stability - Base-on-rear. STABOROl and STAB0R02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stability for base-on-rear configuration 
with face-to-waste horizontal displacement. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in base-on-rear configuration. Apply vertical 

displacement until leg pressure reaches 75 pet yield 

pressure. Apply face-to-waste horizontal displacement until 
leg pressure is reached or shield becomes unstable. Conduct 
tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME: 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1.H2 in 



otl,ot2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate y to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



^TfTTfTTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



1111 



Left 



OOO 
OOO 
OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

tst 

OOO 
.OOP. 

mi 

Canopy 



OU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

«N 

o 
o 



Right 



Base 



STABILITY 



99 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE: 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 


kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 


0.1 
Displacement 0.1 
Displacement 


in/min 
in/min 
in/min 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 




psi/min 
cyc/min 


Vertical only 


Vertical— Horizonta 
Horizontal— Vert ica 
i horizontal 


1 XXX 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



100 



STABILITY 



TEST NAME ; 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Shield Stability - Leg Imbalance. STALEG01 and STALEG02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine shield stability for imbalanced leg pressure 
condition. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with single point contact on canopy at one leg 

location. Relieve leg pressure in leg with no canopy contact 
and maintain zero leg pressure by routing hydraulic line to 
drain. Apply vertical displacement to shield until pressurized 
leg reaches yield or shield becomes unstable. 



Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 
al,a2 

3000 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained 



Fill in appropriate \7 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



Unconstrained xxx 



JL2MMSU 



M7T 




OJLff 



Left 



i 



ooo 
o o o 
ooo 
ooo 
ooo 

ooo 
ooo 
ooo. 

m 

Canopy 



u 



Right 
Left 



H 



Jlffl 



Right 



Base 






STABILITY 



101 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical—Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal—Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


psi/min 
cyc/mi n 

1 xxx 




1 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Force 




vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 


XX 


vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 


XX 


vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R ~ Right side 
C — Center 



\ V- — -I Displaceme 
^\ >i / measuring 



® 




102 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions. LTSUFW01 and 02 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Determine load transfer mechanics for unconstrained shield 
conditions subject to vertical and face-to-waste horizontal 
displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE i Set shield in unconstrained configuration. Apply vertical 
displacement until leg pressure yield. Monitor loading in 
legs and caving shield - link assembly. Repeat tests for 

applied face-to-waste horizontal displacement. 

Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



H1,H2 in 



otl,ot2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



^TTTfTTTT 



m 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 
-#-0-0- 

ooo 
o o o 
o o o 



oo 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

«H 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



Canopy Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



103 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
Horizontal only xxx Horizontal— V 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 




kips/min 






kips/min 






kips/min 




0.1 
0.1 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


izonta 
ertica 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 



xx 
xx 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




104 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions. LTSUWF01 and 02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Determine load transfer mechanics for unconstrained shield 
conditions subject to vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat tests LTSUFW01 and LTSUFW02 substituting waste-to-face 

horizontal displacement for face-to-waste horizontal 

displacement. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



Hl f H2 in 



al t ot2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



^UUIlll 



TTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



OJLS? 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

ts 

o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 

M 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



OTA OA7\ 

Canopy Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



105 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 
Force 


kips/min 
kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


0.1 
Displacement 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 


Displacement 0.1 


in/mi n 

psi/min 

cyc/min 


Vertical only xxx 


Vert i cal ~Hor i zonta 
Horizontal— Vert ica 
j horizontal 


1 


Horizontal only xxx 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

" vs Individual 



Displacement xx 

Displacement xx 

Displacement xx 

Force 

Leg Pressure 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Leg Pressure xx 
Leg Pressure xx 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




106 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Constrained Load Conditions. LTSCFW01 and 02 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine load transfer mechanics for constrained shield 

subjected to vertical and face-to-waste horizontal 

displacement. 



TEST PROCEDURE ; Repeat Tests LTSUFW01 and LTSUFW02 for constrained initial 
load conditions. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 



otl,a2 




3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \/ t0 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



fTTfTTT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



1111 



Left 



OOO 
OOO 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

ooo 

OOO 
OOO 



oo 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

o 
o 



o 



Right 



Canopy Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



107 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 

Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
Horizontal only xxx Horizontal— V 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 




kips/min 






kips/min 




0.1 
0.1 


kips/min 
in/min 
i n/mi n 
in/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


izonta 
ertica 


psi/min 
cyc/mi n 

1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



vs 
vs 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 



xx 
xx 



Instrumented pin forces vs vertical displacement also 
available for analysis. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




108 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer - Constrained Load Conditions. LTSCWF01 and 02 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine load transfer mechanics for constrained shield 
conditions subject to vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat tests LTSCFW01 and LTSCFW02 substituting waste-to- 
face horizontal displacement for face-to-waste horizontal 
displacement. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 

_0 

3000 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate y t0 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



cJIUIIUL, 



ITT 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



1111 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

O O O 

o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 
ooo. 

rrn 

Canopy 



oo 



Right 
Left 



o 


/ ~\ 


o 


o 


f \ 


o 


o 


1 \ 


o 


♦ 


1 * 


♦ 


o 


1 » 


o 


o 




o 



Right 



no 



Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



109 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



xxx 



Vertical — Hori zontal 
Hori zontal — Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement xx 

Displacement xx 

Displacement xx 

Force 

Leg Pressure 



Leg Pressure xx 
Leg Pressure xx 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




110 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Canopy Contact. LTSLEG 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric canopy 
contact at one leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE i Set shield in unsymmetric canopy contact at one leg location 
Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
lemniscate links. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



ctl 



3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate y 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



C> 



WWII 




Left 



O O O 
OO O 

O O O 

o o o 
o o o 

*°^ 

coo 
o o o 

OOP 
Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



n 



Right 



n 



Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



ill 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



xxx 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 


XX 


vs 


Horizontal 


Displacement 


XX 




vs 


Horizontal 


Force 






vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 




XX 


vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 


XX 


XX 


vs 


Individual 


Leg Pressure 


XX 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




112 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Base-on-toe Contact. LTSB0T01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric base-on- 
toe contact. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in unsymmetric base-on-toe contact. 

Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
lemniscate links. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



al 



3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \ 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



JM1W2 




Left 



uu 





• 


t~\ 


• 


Right 


• 


* .. 


o 


Left 


: 

• 


i > 


o 

t 




• 


'-i 


o 



Right 



ktu no 



Canopy 



Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



113 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



0.1 
0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
i n/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



xxx 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 



xx 
xx 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




114 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Base-on-rear Contact. LTSB0R01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer xx 
Structural Integrity 



Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric base-on- 
rear contact. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in unsymmetric base-on-rear contact. 

Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
lemniscate links. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



ol 



3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



c \7\7\7\7Uyy\7 



mi 




Left 



Mil 

O 



Right 
Left 



KITL 

Canopy 



o 
o 

£ 

o 



Right 



nn 

Base 



LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 



115 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



xxx 



xxx 



Vert i cal ~Hor i zontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 
xx vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

" vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 



xx 
xx 



Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
and horizontal displacement also available. 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



Instrumented load 
sensing pins 




116 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Structural Integrity - Full Contact. STRFUL01 thru STRFUL10 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
response for full canopy and base contact and applied 
vertical and horizontal displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6v)» face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1; 6v. Test 2: +6h. 

Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active xxx 



H1,H2 in 

ctl,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



S v , +8 h tests 



tes £ T T T T T 




- 8h tests 



8 v ,+8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



7 v vv 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o c 
o o o 
o o o 
-$-0-$- 

ooo 

o o o 

, o o o , 

STTS 

Canopy 



oo 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 

o 

o 



Right 



no 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



117 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 

Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 

Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4 t 5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



118 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
TEST NAME ; Structural Integrity - Base-on-toe. STRB0L01 thru STRBOT10 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
response for symmetric base-on-toe contact and applied 
vertical and horizontal displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
($v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h)» and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
excessive component strain. Test 1: sv. Test 2: +6h. 
Test 3: -6h. Test 4: sv,+6h. Test 5: 6v t -6h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 

al,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



S uf +8i 



h te s t sf ff Tff TTT^ h/ests 



-8h tests 

— *~w 



ITO 




8 v ,+8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



yvvv 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 
-$-0-$- 

ooo 
o o o 

.OOP. 

rra 

Canopy 



OU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 

o 

& 

o 
o 



Right 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



119 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



120 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Structural Integrity - Base-on-rear. STRB0R01 thru STRB0R10 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
response for symmetric base-on-rear contact and applied 
vertical and horizontal displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+5h) t and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 
Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 



al,a2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \J 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



" + s h test s f f f T T T T T T~? h tests 



-8h tests 



TO 




Sy.+Sh tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



V V V V 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

tst 

o o o 

.OOP. 

n~n 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



Right 



KIKl 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



121 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 

Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 

Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4 t 5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



122 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Structural Integrity-Two-point contact. STRBEN01 - STRBEN10 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 

response for symmetric two-point canopy and base contact and 
applied vertical and horizontal displacements. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6v) t face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +sh. 

Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+sh. Test 5: sv,-6h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 



al,a2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate y 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



^ + Shtes ts ? y\7\/ gpgfff -8 h tests 



-8h tests 



TM 




8 v ,+8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



VWv " 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 

.OOP. 

rra 

Canopy 



UU 





O 


;;. 


o 


Right 


O 


C ,' 


o 


Left 


O 
4> 


v 


o 




o 


'.; 


o 




o 


'"< 


o 



Right 



Base 






STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



123 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force kips/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 

Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O t0 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



124 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBT01-STRUBT10 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 

response for unsymmetric base-on-toe and unsymmetric canopy 
contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(sv), face-to-waste horizontal (+5h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-sh). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 

Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 



otl,a2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



\7 to 8 V , +S h tes ts \/\/\/g\/U\/\/\7 " s h tests 



- 8h tests 




8 vt +8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



TTTT 



Left 



O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

o o o 

tst 

o o o 
, o o o , 

rm 

Canopy 



U.U 



Right 
Left 



• 


/ ~1 


• 


o 


[ > 


o 


o 


o 


o 


4> 


l"» 


♦ 


o 


1 * 


o 


• 


;~> 


o 



Right 



nn 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



125 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 0.1 
Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 


in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Vertical only Test 1 Vertical — Horizonta 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal— Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


1 




1 




Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



126 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
TEST NAME : Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBR01-STRUBR10 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 

response for unsymmetric base-on-rear and unsymmetric canopy 
contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-5h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1: sv. Test 2: +6h. 

Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: sv»-5h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 



01,02 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate S] to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



Sv, +S h tests 



5 £ \/m\7 



-Sh tests 




Jh tests 



TM 



8 v ,+8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



TTTT 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
4o^ 
ooo 
o o o 

, O O O , 

iTTi 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 
o 

o 



Right 



nn 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



127 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal —Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Horizontal 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



128 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
TEST NAME : Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBT11-STRUBT20 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 

response for unsymmetric base-on-toe and symmetric canopy 
contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-5h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 

Test 3: -sh. Test 4: {v,+6h. Test 5: sv,-6h. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static 



Active xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



H1.H2 in 

al,a2 degrees from vertical 

degrees from horizontal 

3000 psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



*«• ^" " i VVVVVyvV V " s h ' • 




-Sh tests 



8 V ,+Sh tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



UU 



Left 



O O O 

o o o 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 
♦ o + 
o o o 
o o o 
, o o o , 

rm 

Canopy 



m 



Right 
Left 



O 

o 

$ 

o 

o 



Right 



nn 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



129 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
Vertical Displacement 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 
Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 



Displacement 
Displacement 



0.1 
0.1 
0.1 



Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal —Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



kips/min 


kips/mi n 


kips/min 


in/mi n 


in/mi n 


in/min 


psi/min 


cyc/min 


Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



xx 

XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



130 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBR11-STRUBR20 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



OBJECTIVE: 



Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 

response for unsymmetric base-on-rear and symmetric canopy 
contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
(6V). face-to-waste horizontal (+5h), and waste-to-face horz, 
displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 

excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +3h. 

Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h . Test 5: 6v,-$h. 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active xxx 



H1,H2 in 



0tl,0t2 







3000 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



V +s h test ^y q y g y 




-Sh tests 



-S h tests 



S v ,+8h tests 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



YTTT 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

*°+ 

ooo 
o o o 
ooo 

rm 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 

O 

O 



Right 



nn 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



131 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force kips/min 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 

Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 

Leg Pressure psi/min 

Cycles per minute cyc/min 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 
Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal— Vertical 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



Test 4,5 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Horizontal 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



xx 

XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 
XX 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 




Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



132 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Fatigue Failure - Full Contact. 



Test FATFUL01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for full canopy and base contact. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



Gtl 



yield 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



V to 



MTTTTfT 




Fill in appropriate C to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



ojj? 



Left 



O OO 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 
4-o-$- 

ooo 
o o o 

.OOP. 

mi 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



o 


/ ~1 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


4 

o 




t 


o 


' 1 


o 



Right 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



133 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



yield 
1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vert i cal — Hor i zontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Strain Channels vs 
Vertical Force vs 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels vs 

Comments: 



Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Displacement 
Vertical Force 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Sum of Leg Pressures 
Number of cycles 



xx 
xx 
xx 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



134 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure - Canopy. 



Test FATCAN01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading of canopy unit. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in canopy unit 
prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 

crack growth after every l t 000 cycles. Monitor nominal 

canopy strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



ol 



yield 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate ^ 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



T\7U\7UU\7\7 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



vvvv 



Left 



OOO 
O O O 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

4-o4- 

ooo 

OOO 
.OOP. 

KTU 

Canopy 



oy_y 



Right 



Left 



o 


t't 


o 


o 


* ^ 


o 


o 


l" \ 


o 


♦ 


, ~\ 


♦ 


o 


1 * 


o 


o 




o 



Right 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



135 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 


Force 
Force 

Displacement 
Displacement 

Vertical— Hoi 
Horizontal—) 
J horizontal 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 




kips/min 
kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 




in/mi n 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 




in/mi n 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 




in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only 


yield 
1 

-izonta 
/ertica 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



vs Vertical 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force vs Vertical 
Strain Channels vs Vertical 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force vs 
Strain Channels 



vs Vertical 
vs Sum of 
vs Sum of 
Sum of 



Displacement 
Displacement 
Displacement 
Force 
Leg Pressures 
Leg Pressures 
Leg Pressures 



vs Number of cycles 



vs 


Horizontal 


vs 
vs 


Horizontal 
Horizontal 


vs 


Horizontal 


vs 


Individual 


XX vs 
XX vs 
XX 


Individual 
Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



Comments: 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



136 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Fatigue Failure - Base. 



Test FATBAS01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading of base unit. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in base unit 
prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal base 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Static xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active 

HI 

otl 



yield 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



,TTTTTTTT 



TTO 




Fill in appropriate O t0 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



y\m 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

nt 

o o o 

OOP 
Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

O 

o 



o 
o 



Right 



nn 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



137 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



yield 
1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Horizontal— Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 
xx 
xx 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



138 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 



Fatigue Failure - Zero Horizontal Loading 



Test FATH0R01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 
Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity 



xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading of shield when subjected to load 
conditions which eliminate external horizontal loading. 



TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 

Constrained 



HI 



in 



al 



yield 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Unconstrained xxx 



Rollers 



ttttt 



Fill in appropriate \/ to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



O 



Rollers 



jn 




y\/\7\7 



Fill in appropriate O t0 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 
O O O 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 



ue 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

«H 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 

\& 

o 
o 



Right 



nxs on 



Canopy 



Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



139 



LOAD APPLICATION ; 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



yield 
1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
eye /mi n 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Horizontal —Vertical 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



xxx 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force vs Vertical Displacement 
Horizontal Force vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
Horizontal Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
Strain Channels vs Number of cycles 



Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 



xx 
xx 
xx 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



Comments: 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 



Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




140 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure - Base-on-toe Configuration. Test FATB0T01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for symmetric base-on-toe 
configuration. 



TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Hl_ in 

degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 



ol 



yield psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



V 



to 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



cJIIUIII 




TM 



LLP 



Left 



O O O 
OO O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

$8 

o o o 
, o o o , 

ktu 

Canopy 



UU 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

o 



o 
o 
o 

\b 

o 
o 



Right 



sin 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



141 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 
Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Force 
Force 

Displacement 
Displacement 

Vertical— Hor 
Horizontal — V 
J horizontal 




kips/min 
kips/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 




kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 




in/mi n 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 




in/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 




in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only 


yield 
1 

'izonta 
fertica 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



14: 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME : 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure - Base-on-rear Configuration. Test FATB0R01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 

Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for symmetric base-on-rear 
configuration. 



TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME: 



SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



ol 



yield 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate \J to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



_J1UIIU 




Fill in appropriate O t0 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



WW 



Left 



OOO 
OO O 

OOO 
OOO 
OOO 

tzt 

OOO 
OOO 



uu 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
O 

o 

o 



Right 



on KIKl 

Canopy Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



143 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



yield 
1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/mi n 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vertical —Horizontal 
Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 
xx 
xx 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



144 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME ; 
TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure - Leg Socket Shear. 



Test FATB0R01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for canopy and base contact 
adjacent leg connection. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 

crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active 
HI 

mi 


yield 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



Fill in appropriate V 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 



to 



^ jmuin 




Fill in appropriate O *° 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



o_o 



Left 



O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

ooo 
o o o 

OOP 

on 

Canopy 



OU 



Right 
Left 



o 


' 1 


o 


o 


t \ 


o 


o 


t m \ 


o 


* 


1 * 


♦ 


o 


1 > 


o 


o 


*' 


o 



Right 



KlU 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



145 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical Force 




kips/min 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 
Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Force 
Force 


kips/min 
kips/min 


Vertical Displacement 




in/mi n 


Face-to-waste Horizontal 


Displacement 


in/min 


Waste-to-face Horizontal 


Displacement 


in/mi n 


Leg Pressure 
Cycles per minute 

Vertical only 


yield 
1 

Vertical — Horizonta 
Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
i horizontal 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 


Horizontal only 


1 


Simultaneous vertical an< 





DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Horizontal 

vs Individual 

xx vs Individual 



xx vs Individual 



xx 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 



Nomenclature: 



L -- Left side 
R -- Right side 
C — Center 




146 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure-Unsymmetric Contact Configuration. FATUSY01 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for unsymmetric base-on-toe contact 
with unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 

crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 

Static xxx Active 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



HI 



in 



ol 



yield 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



yyyyyyyy 



Fill in appropriate \7 to 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



Left 



O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

O O O 

ooo 
o o o 
ooo 



no 



Right 
Left 



O 
O 
M 

o 



o 
o 

o 
o 



Right 



/nrn no 

Canopy Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



147 



LOAD APPLICATION : 

CONTROL PARAMETERS 



AND LOADING RATES: 


Vertical Force 


kips/min 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 


kips/min 




Vertical Displacement 


in/mi n 




Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 




Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 


in/mi n 


LOAD SEQUENCE: 


Leq Pressure yield 
Cycles per minute 1 

Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 


psi/min 
cyc/min 

1 




1 







DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 



Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Strain Channels 
Vertical Force 
Horizontal Force 
Strain Channels 

Comments: 



vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Displacement 
vs Vertical Force 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
vs Number of cycles 



xx 
xx 
xx 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure 



xx 
xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 



148 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



TEST NAME: 



TEST SERIES: 



OBJECTIVE: 



SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 

Fatigue Failure-Unsymmetric Contact Configuration. FATUSY02 



Resistance Characteristics 
Shield Stiffness 
Leg Mechanics 



Stability 

Load Transfer 
Structural Integrity xx 



Evaluate fatigue loading for unsymmetric base-on-rear 
contact with unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 



TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 

operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 

pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 

crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 



TEST FRAME : 

SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 



BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 



Static xxx 



Shield Height 
Leg inclination 
Canopy rotation 
Setting Pressure 



Active 

HI 

al 



yield 



in 



degrees from vertical 
degrees from horizontal 
psi 



Constrained xxx Unconstrained 



y\7\7\7uyuu 



Fill in appropriate V t0 
establish symmetric 
contact configuration 




Fill in appropriate O to 
establish unsymmetric contact 
configuration 



Left 



O OO 
O O O 

O O O 
O O O 
O O O 

o o o 
o o o 
o o o 



uu 



Right 
Left 



Canopy 



o 
o 

o 



o 
o 
o 

$■ 

o 



Right 



nn 

Base 



STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 



149 



LOAD APPLICATION: 



CONTROL PARAMETERS 
AND LOADING RATES: 



Vertical Force 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 

Vertical Displacement 

Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 

Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 

Leg Pressure 

Cycles per minute 



yield 
1 



kips/min 
kips/min 
kips/min 
in/mi n 
in/min 
in/mi n 
psi/min 
cyc/min 



LOAD SEQUENCE : 



Vertical only 
Horizontal only 



Vert i cal —Hori zontal 
Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 



Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 



DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS : 

Vertical Force vs Vertical Displacement 

Horizontal Force vs Vertical Displacement " 

Strain Channels vs Vertical Displacement 

Strain Channels vs Vertical Force 

Strain Channels vs Sum of Leg Pressures 

Vertical Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures xx 
Horizontal Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures xx 
Strain Channels vs Number of cycles xx 

Comments: 



vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Horizontal 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 
vs Individual 



Displacement 

Displacement 

Displacement 

Force 

Leg Pressure 

Leg Pressure xx 
Leg Pressure xx 



INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 



Fill in appropriate O to 
establish instrumentation 
location. 

Nomenclature: L — Left side 
R — Right side 
C — Center 




INT.BU.OF MINES,PGH.,PA 29002 




178 90 















\\A* ^*^v 'Wmk=?' > a v *^ »* 



J\. 







\« 




«w> 




^^ 




w v 





A <^ -o.»» ,0 V ^ •/^7» VV <./••"• ^ ^"•*"ST«\^V 




s* .••«, ***, 



• >■* 










^o* 






' rf* ... % -4 „* v 








V.<? 






t . o„ 



> V 




»P<fc 







1 K 



£ ^ *.^ S^* 













S\ 



*o« 









•^o* 









V^ 1 * 












V** • A: \/ .'£& %^ 

«? ^ .(ft r» ^ «^ 







o * • 










4> -.-•* *^ 




,( 



"oV 1 




o Ay 



0* V 









.. •' 




» • 












%^ ^:\/M V^ SMS;* \/ 



^ v *v. 



. . * 






HECKMAN 

BINDERY INC. 



1990 



N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962 







*-. « 











^"...., "^ A*" ... ~* 







v oV 



• ri' 




